Alternate Best Actor 1962: Toshiro Mifune in Sanjuro

Toshiro Mifune did not receive an Oscar nomination for playing the samurai in Sanjuro.

Sanjuro is a fantastic sequel to Yojimbo this time about the samurai trying to help a group of men
defeat the corrupt men trying to ruin their clan from within.

Now I've said again and again that it is astonishing the way Toshiro Mifune can find such a variety even in similair roles. Well here comes a challenge because Mifune is playing the exact same role he had in Yojimbo. Reprising a role, especially a heroic seemingly straight forward role often can be difficult. It not only seems difficult to regain that same exact enthusiasm, but also there usually is a problem when the character's arc was always finished by the end of the original film. Well Mifune already gave a great performance as the samurai in Yojimbo, and this time he actually has a slightly less dramatic role to play in terms of the way the story plays out. Now just that base line of the performance in terms of being the badass cool character that the samurai was in the original once again is can be found in the sequel. That old dog twitch once again is found here, and that whole easy going yet quietly intense manner. None of it feels repetitious in the least, and it is clear that Mifune lost none of his devotion to the role in the year between the reprise. Of course one might argue that all that had work was done in the first film, which is true to a point, but Mifune does deserve credit for not losing that certain magic in the transition.

The film though is different as Yojimbo, though that film had its moments of fun to be sure, it was a considerably darker story in general than Sanjuro. Though Sanjuro has some bloodshed itself  its tone in general is shifted to the lighter side of things, and I honestly I'd quite easily say that it's really a comedy. There is a reason Mifune/Kurosawa are the greatest actor/director pair of all time, and that is because it always seemed as though they were in sync with one another. That's once again the case as Mifune gives almost a purely comedic turn in his reprise here. It's intriguing as Mifune basically plays it as the samurai is taking the whole thing a bit less seriously than last time. This does not seem out of place as Sanjuro, despite having some lives on the line, is very lighthearted, for example when captured the samurai in Yojimbo was beaten to an inch of his life, here they just tie him up. This all works of course because the film actually is rather hilarious. Mifune is one of those who contributes the most to this. He was funny in Yojimbo as well when the samurai flaunted his superior intelligence over his foes, and he does this once again. Mifune though perhaps plays it up all the more, though with a slight adjustment as it is positioned to teach his allies this time rather than provoke his enemies.

Mifune is a whole lot of fun here as he basically has the samurai even more on top of his game than even in Yojimbo as he attempts to help the group of men he's helping win the day. Mifune portrays an enjoyable detachment of sorts as he helps the men, more of because it is simply his nature to do the right thing rather than having any particular affection for the men. In fact some of the funniest moments in the film are from Mifune's exasperated reactions at the men as he has to deal with the bumbling men who consistently makes the wrong decision leaving samurai to correct things. Though Mifune is so perfectly sardonic on the surface, once again though Mifune quietly conveys the honest goodness in the samurai in the moments where no one else is looking. Of course Mifune here does not even necessarily leave these moments as too serious for example in one scene where the samurai is left to look after two somewhat daffy women who were rescued from the corrupt men, Mifune delivers the genuine concern in the samurai as he watches over them, but Mifune again makes the scene very amusing actually by depicting a slight confusion in his silent reaction as he watches their somewhat bizarre behavior.

Now there is slight expansion on the character is that in this one, fitting its lighter tone, is that the samurai is getting a bit tired of killing and would rather not kill if possible. Again Mifune is very good in depicting this conflict in the samurai well portraying just a powerful yet subtle outrage in the samurai whenever he is forced to kill due to the foolishness of others. The one other mainly dramatic element in this one is in his relationship with the most competent villain of the film, Hanbei, played by Tatsuya Nakadai of course. What's interesting about this one is that even though they are at ends, more or less being the only competent member of each of their groups therefore at odds with one another, the relationship between the two is quite the opposite. Mifune does not depict a hatred in the samurai for this man instead he is quite effective in revealing a certain respect towards him, not for the actions of the man, but rather Mifune shows that the samurai senses a man who is of a similair spirit. For most of their interactions there is not any hate and Mifune is very good with Nakadai in establishing almost a friendship of sorts as the two do get along. Of course Hanbei being a self proclaimed rotten man will prevent this from ever occurring leading to a final confrontation. Mifune is terrific as he portrays an anger in the duel. What's remarkable is that is is not an anger towards Hanbei, but rather anger towards the circumstances that force him to potentially kill a man who is in many ways like the samurai. Mifune finds a new place to take the character, even managing to shift the tone of him slightly without losing what made the role special to begin with. I won't say he bests his work in Yojimbo, but it's a strong reprise that comes close to matching that great performance.

Alternate Best Actor 1962: Laurence Harvey in The Manchurian Candidate

Laurence Harvey did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Staff Sergeant Raymond Shaw in The Manchurian Candidate.

The Manchurian Candidate is an effective thriller about a two men being brainwashed by communists with being forced to commit nefarious deeds in order to control the U.S. government from within.

Laurence Harvey plays the central pawn to this plot Raymond Shaw, though Frank Sinatra's Captain Marco is also given ample time who begins to uncover the scheme due to a recurrent nightmare. Harvey's part here is a rather thankless role actually, but it is an interesting one to examine to see what exactly Harvey does within these certain limitations. The first challenge of the part is in the character of Raymond Shaw, who is suppose to be unlikable, which is very important to the plot since one of the things that tips Marco off that something is wrong is that the brainwashed army unit have all been forced to recite how great of a guy Shaw. Well Harvey certainly fulfills this need of the part as he plays much of the role in a very distant and almost viciously cold manner. He makes Raymond like a sharpened stone as he seems unwavering in his manner yet there is something most unpleasant in this determination. This is the right approach though not only to fulfill that plot point, but also Havery utilizes it to show where Raymond has come from. In his scenes with his horrible mother (Angela Lansbury) and his step father we see how Raymond would have become this way.

Harvey's very good in making such a considerable anti-chemistry of sorts in his scenes with his "parents". Harvey plays it as though Raymond is always on the attack with them as he is quite aware of how despicable they both are, and really he does not even know the half of it. Harvey makes Raymond at his most raw here as his searing anger is a constant in his interactions with them, and even when it is just his mother talking Harvey is very effective in the way that he shows that Raymond is pained by her very presence. Harvey makes this as almost a transference in his interactions with everyone else as at the very best he's a bit distant, and at the worst he still seems a bit hostile as though his upbringing has left him at a constant unease with everyone. The only relationship we see that is opposed to this is Raymond's romantic one with the daughter of one of his stepfather's staunchest opponents. This scenes are done in an almost an excessively simple way, which works as a contrast to the details of the main story, but Harvey uses them well. Harvey brings a sincere happiness in Raymond in these scenes, that almost has a certain timid quality to it as though Shaw not only is new to it, but almost does not quite know what to say when dealing with this new experience.

Now of course Raymond purpose in the film is being used as an agent for the communists to commit their plot, which is actually spearheaded by his own mother. These scenes may seem standard enough in portraying just the detached zombie who carries out orders. Harvey does handle them well by never making it seem corny but rather chilling in depicting the single minded yet blank manner of Raymond as he carries out the orders no matter how brutal they may be. Even when Raymond kills it is nothing but a straight forward act as though he is opening a door. This might seem like a minor detail but Harvey uses it brilliantly in his last scene of the film, which also the best scene of the film. As it seems Raymond is still programmed to carry out the assassination which will put his stepfather in power. Suddenly as Raymond is pulling the trigger though Harvey suddenly reveals something that had been lacking in all the other kills, an emotional fury in his eyes, as it becomes clear Raymond is of his own will as kills those who had always been using him instead. Harvey makes the final seconds of his performance surprisingly heartbreaking as he reveals Raymond finally in full control of himself though only to be in the horror that his mother has put him. There is a satisfaction that Harvey reveals at their deaths as well as relief, though also a terrible grief as Raymond is well aware of what his life has been. The moment is swift yet the power of it is palatable due to Harvey so successfully finding the cruelty behind the use of a man as simply a tool.

Alternate Best Actor 1962: James Mason in Lolita

James Mason did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a Bafta and a Golden Globe, for portraying Professor Humbert Humbert in Lolita.

Lolita is an off beat telling of the story of a middle aged intellectual becoming infatuated with the fourteen year old girl in the home he boards in.

James Mason took on the role that he had turned down originally, apparently due to scheduling conflicts, but before his schedule allowed him to take the role it was turned down by Laurence Olivier and David Niven, Olivier based on the advice of his agents, and Niven over concerns for his TV show. This is not at all surprising considering that the role of Humbert Humbert is that of a pedophile, and that is not the only challenge within the role, though certainly a major one. Now starting at the beginning, in chronological terms that is, Mason's casting could not be more perfect as Mason, think of simply the image of an "intellectual" and Mason just seems to fit. This is surprisingly important for the performance though as Mason being such a naturally dignified presence gives Humbert almost a forced dignity. Mason tricks you almost into accepting Humbert more than you might have otherwise since Mason so effectively exudes the sort of respectability and intelligence one would expect from Humbert, a noted lecturer on French literature you know, even though what Humbert does in the film in no way supports this idea, since Humbert really is anything but respectable as we find out throughout the story.

It is hard to imagine anyone else in the role actually because Mason's whole approach, and presence enable the character in a way one would not expect one would not mind following through the film's run time. It is interesting to examine Mason's work as he does not in anyway attempt to make Humbert likable to make for his indiscretions, in fact many things work in quite the opposite fashion. For example in the early scene where he's looking at the house to stay being shown by the somewhat lusty Charlotte Haze (Shelley Winters), there is a definite air of superiority in Humbert's interactions yet Mason again is just so good at presenting this sort of type that you feel he earns it. Of course this in a way seems subverted quite quickly when Humbert makes his decision to stay in Charlotte's home because he glances at Charlotte's 14 year old daughter Lolita(Sue Lyon). Mason reveals an understated yet clearly rather considerable lust as Humbert eyes her. The stare of a creepy old man to be sure in terms of content yet Mason oddly enough manages to so carefully not go overboard, while in no way hiding the intention of his character from the audience. It's so brilliantly handled by Mason as he allows us to follow Humbert in a way, you wouldn't imagine one could.

Well as Mason in a way tricks us into allowing Humbert to be our lead, Stanley Kubrick actually continues to throws various challenges against him as the film progresses. The film's tone actually has strong vein of humor in it mostly through the character of Clare Quilty (Peter Sellers), and this presents two severe yet possible pitfalls for Mason's performance. The first being that the film very easily considering the subject matter and the style of humor combined could just become rather grotesque, the other being that Humbert as well as Mason could have been completely overshadowed by Sellers, and the madness he makes with his performance as another man interested in Lolita. Well again Mason is the rock center of the film that really makes everything come together as it does, because he always keeps such a distinct sense of honesty in his performance as Humbert. The thing is though that Mason actually even does have technically comical moments, in the darkest of ways usually mostly coming from his interactions with Winters's character. Though Mason succeeds in being rather enjoyable in showing just how technically cruel is towards is to her, as he does so successfully create the sense of false interest in the scenes with Charlotte, yet always undercuts them by never leaving Humbert's true desires in question for the audience.

Now even on point with Sellers, Mason is essential to Sellers's is performance, as it is Mason's performance that allows his take on Quilty to exist, since if the actor playing Humbert tried to actively go for laughs along with Sellers, the film very easily could have gone off the rails losing complete sight of the main point of the story. Mason loses none of the potential humor brought on by Sellers by being a terrific straight man to him. Mason's timing against Sellers is impeccable as he keeps Humbert just out of sync with him in the right fashion, since even though they share the same goal for themselves they are of adifferent mind. Mason quite adept though in funneling his moments with Sellers by keeping Humbert so perfectly out of touch, and unaware of the game that this other man is playing. Mason encourages the laughs found in the material, but never allows it to overwhelm the story, keeping Humbert's dilemma more than just a very dark joke. Mason is extremely effective in the role because he does not ever hold back in terms of actually delving into revealing that lust in Humbert, as he portrays Humbert as a man stricken by an obsession. Mason is excellent in that he does keep up the shield of Humbert, through his own presentation of the "good" professor, while never failing to subtly delve into the mind of the man, who falls into his own personal abyss.

Mason actually makes the gradual revelation of just how dark Humbert's inclination particularly effective because of the way he began as that assured and proper sort. Mason is outstanding in the way he slowly shows the loss of this facade of sorts in a way as circumstances allow him to pursue Lolita in a way he had not be allowed to before. Mason is able to realize the sheer primal nature of the urges as this rather base side of Humbert makes itself more known, as his interactions with Lolita become all the more obvious, and eventually this leads to them becoming involved beyond some questionable glances towards one another. Mason portrays this as only becoming more detrimental for Humbert as it forces out all of the worst aspects of his personality as man. Mason makes this very disconcerting because he loses that usual ease of control of one self Mason presents, instead now revealing a desperation in Humbert as he attempts to control every part of Lolita's life. Mason is so good as he presents just how ruinous the relationship is for Humbert as that confidence begins to wain, and this terrible sense of unease seems ever present in every movement he makes. Mason is incredible as he depicts the crumbling mental and physical state of Humbert. This descent is marvelously performed and is all the more remarkable because of how Mason strips away that apparent respectability originally found in Humbert. Mason shows how Humbert basically loses himself as Mason so vividly creates the terrible pain in Humbert from the stress of his paranoia, as well as how terrible of a wretch he has become as he finds that Lolita has been tricking him the whole time. In the final scenes of the film Mason is absolutely amazing as he takes Humbert to his lowest point. The first being as he brings Humbert to his most vulnerable as Humbert makes one final attempt to get Lolita back. Mason makes Humbert an emotional wreck as he basically begs her to come back to him leaving him with almost nothing left. This leads him to only thing he has left which is to seek vengeance against his rival Quilty, which is actually the first scene of the film. Mason chilling in the scene because he makes this essentially the death of Humbert as he's murdering the other man as there is such a single minded cruelty, and hate is all there is in his eyes in the end as that's all there is left to him. This is one of Mason's best performances as his portrayal of Humbert enables the film to work not only in terms of creating a captivating portrait of Humbert's story of personal decay, but also in flawlessly finding the exact right footing in terms of the character as well as the film's style that prevents the film from collapsing due to its more scandalous elements.

Alternate Best Actor 1962: Tatsuya Nakadai in Harakiri

Tatsuya Nakadai did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Hanshiro Tsugumo in Harakiri.

Harakiri is an excellent film about a samurai who comes to a feudal lords's home to request the right of suicide, harakiri, according to the code of Bushido, but all is not as it seems.

Tatsuya Nakadai plays a samurai, which is neither the first nor the last time, you'll see me writing this. Nakadai like his frequent onscreen opponent Toshiro Mifune, often played roles that potentially seem similair, Nakadai here plays a samurai which he would later do in Samurai Rebellion, The Sword of Doom, and in 62 as well with Sanjuro, just to name a few. Nakadai though does not deliver the same performance for any one of those films that I mentioned, nor does he do so here. We first see Nakadai in the film in what one what assume is in a terrible state, as his character Hanshiro Tsugumo requests the feudal Lord to allow him to commit the official act of suicide in his courtyard. Nakadai does not play Hanshiro as overtly depressed, in that he's not just this sad man making a request. There's something else going and Nakadai brilliantly reflects this with his performance. It does seem like a man with death on the mind, though not exactly as one might expect. As he says that he will be dying soon in his eyes one knows this to be, true as Nakadai reveals such a powerful conviction in them. Again though what it alludes to is made purposefully a mystery by the film as well as Nakadai's performance.

Nakadai is a fascinating enigma in these early scenes as Hanshiro first introduces his request to the lord. Nakadai commands each scene with a striking voice of someone who seems to be absolutely certain of his fate. It goes even more than that though as there is something in his voice that is almost otherworldly in his whole manner. The way he stares through the men, and the way he moves is though he is from some high plane of existence than the Lord. Nakadai is amazing in that he creates this peculiar state of his character in these scenes, as he speaks and acts with this certain detachment towards the world and the Lord, yet there is some emotional quality about. Nakadai is haunting as he seems to make Hanshiro almost some sort of spirit who has arrived at the gate. Hanshiro is told by the Lord another story of a samurai who made a similair request, which lead the lord's men to have the man forcefully commit suicide in an extremely painful way by making him use a bamboo knife while refusing to grant mercy. As Hanshiro is told this story though Nakadai portrays no loss in Hanshiro's reserve in the least, the conviction stands without question, and Hanshiro stays as something more than a man as he insists on the right of Harakiri.

Eventually when he takes to the courtyard to perform the rite Hanshiro requests assistance from the the men who were instrumental in the brutal treatment of that other samurai. All of the men claim to be sick, and Lord wishes for Hanshiro to proceed, but Hanshiro reveals that he was well aware of the other samurai's story even before the lord told him. We are then given a flashback to see Hanshiro some time ago as a samurai with a daughter to support, but no wars to fight so no Lord to support him, trying to make ends meat best he can. Nakadai presents a very different man in these scenes playing Hanshiro much more of an average enough guy. His voice actually far more relaxed as is his whole manner. Although his financial troubles are there Nakadai presents the man effectively as a man happy with the life he has, and just a likable man trying to make it through life with his daughter. This eventually turns to with his daughter, and her eventual husband and father to Hanshiro's grandson who just happens to be that samurai who had been forced to commit Harakiri before Hanshiro.

The hardships only continue to build up as there is no work for the unemployed samurai, and Hanshiro's grandson falls ill. Nakadai is excellent, as unlike the scenes set in the present, he takes a more straight forward approach which is fitting to Hanshiro who is just trying to live out his life in peace. Nakadai does well just only present Hanshiro as a genuine caring man and is incredibly moving in depicting Hanshiro's reactions to his growing misfortunes. Nakadai is especially affecting because that contentment and optimism of before just slowly seems to seep out of the man as things only become worse. Nakadai is heartbreaking as he shows that just everything that goes wrong so deeply wounds Hanshiro, and importantly though Nakadai presents this not as Hanshiro feeling sorry for himself, but rather a deep empathy for the three members of his family. Even with this hardship this man still does not seem to be that man telling the story, even when the body of his son-in-law is brought to his home. Nakadai portrays a man not filled with anything but a deep overwhelming sadness as well as this certain resignation as he sees the corpse mutilated. The flashbacks of that portion ends though as Hanshiro informs the Lord that soon afterwards his daughter and grandson died shortly after.

The mystery behind Hanshiro becomes shattered, but nothing is lost in terms of Nakadai's performance instead only new depths are found in what Nakadai has only shown. Nakadai does not actually alter his performance in the least at this point, nor should he as Hanshiro has been very much set on his path since he first entered the Lord's domain. What Nakadai has already shown though suddenly can be seen in a new light. Those intense eyes of his, have the wear of a sea of tears, and that voice of his changed through the cries of anguish. Though we now know he is indeed a man he might as well not be, as Nakadai portrays Hanshiro as a spirit of vengeance. This is of course not in the literal sense, but he seems as omnipresent as a ghost who can wander freely. Nakadai realizes the force within Hanshiro as being worldly, but seemingly as terrible as a power beyond the realm of man, by being a man so transfixed on one objective. Nakadai does not even depict this as though Hanshiro is merely obsessed, he's gone beyond that point, as Nakadai creates the sense in Hanshiro that this objective is all he has left, his sadness having turned into a internalized yet volcanic rage at both the men as well as the system that wronged his family. Nakadai is outstanding in his final scene as the will is within his eyes, and his voice. The sheer might of it is made true by Nakadai's performance that derives it from such fierce emotion. It such remarkable work as Nakadai because even as he so poignantly reveals the man behind the cryptic, he never loses that aura around him. Nakadai makes it so Hanshiro is more than a man, yet is still a man, it is a tremendous performance.

Alternate Best Actor 1962: Tom Courtenay in The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner

Tom Courtenay did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Colin Smith in The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner.

The Loneliness of Long Distance Runner is an intriguing enough kitchen sink drama about a young man being sent to a reformatory due to a robbery he committed.

I've already covered the always underrated Courtenay for his later foray in another film considered a kitchen sink drama, Billy Liar, though the leads of these films are often referred as the angry young man, that was less so the case for Billy Liar who would have been better referred to as the aimless young man, though technically speaking Colin Smith is also aimless. It's interesting to compare the two performances though as Courtenay crafts two distinct characters that differ in style as well. In the broad strokes, though it was not that simple in the least, as Billy Liar Courtenay gave most often a comic performance in his depiction of the young man who preferred fantasies over reality, though this did indeed hide a very troubled state of mind beneath it all. Here with The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner Courtenay is given much more directly that angry young man type. One of the best scene in the opening scenes of the film as he's taken to the reformatory and is given the initial speech by the superintendent (Michael Redgrave). The sheer hatred Courtenay conveys as Colin stares down the warden sets up perfectly where Colin's state of mind is at the beginning of the film though technically it is more of the middle of the story.

As we proceed in these early scenes Courtenay is extremely effective in revealing the manner of Colin which is the epitome of a rebel without a cause, but unlike say James Dean there is nothing "cool" about Courtenay's portrayal. Courtenay instead does not hold back on the harshness of the nature of this anger showing it as something that is very much off-putting as there does not seem to be an exact purpose for it at first. Courtenay rather than having his character defines his defiance, it is simply the act of defiance that defines Colin. Courtenay does not show anything promising in Colin with his work though instead revealing a very definite problem with the man, as the intensity he brings to his anger suggests not a man waiting or wanting to do something right, rather a man who soon could do something quite wrong very soon. Courtenay is terrific because he establishes this being Colin at his absolute worst point that so well reflects what we later learn about Colin, but with all those other elements, in combination with imprisonment, Courtenay reveals the combination of all these pains into a truly troubled young man. Very naturally though Courtenay does not allow Colin to be defined by this note, as times passes, as well as when we see what came before, Courtenay presents us the greater whole of Colin.

This sort of begins with Colin's time with the prison psychiatrist who tries to discover his problems. Courtenay is great because he still has that sharpness, that fervor against the man representing authority currently, though now tempered a bit as he's simply has time to cool down in addition to the psychiatrist being a empathetic man. Courtenay brilliantly begins to peal away more at Colin for us though when the psychiatrist asks about his father and Colin reveals that he died. Courtenay is exceptional in this moment as he so subtly reveals a palatable grief over his father's death while still holding up that front that Colin keeps. This eventually leads us to the flashback sequences of the film where Colin is an aimless young man living with his family including his dying father that seems to concern his concern his mother very little. Courtenay once again is absolutely fantastic in how well he gets across what is going on beneath Colin. On the surface again there is always that hint of anger, that gets stronger at certain understandable moments, and often a sense of ambivalence towards life as though he's in some way above it. Courtenay though is so good though as there is such a striking undercurrent of sadness in Colin, who is heartbroken over his father made all the worse because of his mother's indifference.

Courtenay continues to excel in the way he furthers the character in the scenes away from his family or any potential authority figures where he puts on that tough guy act of sorts. Outside of those scenes, particularly when he and his friend attempt at romancing two young women, Courtenay brings out this more genuine youth in Colin. This is indeed in moments of just simple juvenile excitement in doing some occasional acts of thefts as well as simply trying to impresses the women, but Courtenay also is quite powerful as he brings out that vulnerability, that he certainly alluded to before, into the open when he is alone with just one of the women. Courtenay is marvelous as he shows the shy confused man that Colin is deep down inside, and actually presents a certain sweetness by removing any of those barriers that Colin usually keeps firmly in place. In these brief moments Courtenay is able to create the sense of what compels Colin otherwise though by granting this sensitivity in him, but also a certain considerable fear both in terms of avoiding what his father became as well as simply to face what he must face. Courtenay makes sense of Colin's confused state so well that the fact that his robberies only become riskier ends up feeling like an inevitability, since Courtenay shows that Colin really has no idea what he is doing or what he should do.

Now the film also depicts Colin continuing life in the detention center where Courtenay slowly eases away that hatred that was so strong at first, as Colin finds that he has a knack for long distance running, which makes superintendent happy for purely selfish reasons involving a competition between the center and a school. Colin begins to fall very much into line, which Courtenay also gives sense to not only through the fact that Colin's clearly had time to calm down, but also in the moments of the running. In these moments Courtenay expresses a considerable enthusiasm and joy as Courtenay shows Colin finally doing something seemingly on his own terms that also seems to have some purpose. This eventually leads to the climatic race which Colin easily could win, but just before the finish line stops to the fury of all. The rebellious streak reappears in Colin, and this could easily have been a meaningless moment if it were not for Courtenay's portrayal of it. It is not an anger that compels Colin this time. Courtenay instead shows Colin know far more aware of his own self, and instead presents a moment of a personal pride of sorts as Colin stops in defiance not in hatred, but rather to be his own man. Tom Courtenay gives a great performance here and one of the very best Kitchen Sink performances here because he never leaves Colin Smith as just an "angry young man", he finds what there is beneath that surface,  painting a most compelling portrait of a man lost trying to find some path which he can call his own.

Alternate Best Actor 1962: Patrick McGoohan in All Night Long

Patrick McGoohan did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Johnnie Cousin in All Night Long.

All Night Long is an interesting film which is a modernized version of Othello through the world of Jazz and set on a single night in London.

Patrick McGoohan plays Johnnie Cousin but for the purposes of the story he serves the role of Iago. Johnnie is an ambitious drummer and just like Iago he plans the downfall of his "friend" and fellow musician Aurelius Rex (Paul Harris), and Rex's wife as well as retiring Jazz singer Delia (Marti Stevens). The film gives a bit more of a motivation for Iago than Shakespeare settled on as it is obvious Cousin's plan is to make it so he gets Delia as a singer for the band he wants to start since she has decided to retire after getting married to Rex, and I'll admit I always preferred when Iago's malevolence is left a mystery with the performance being the main clue. That's not to say that Johnnie Cousin is too much a simplified version of Iago, certainly not through McGoohan's performance. McGoohan, just as he would later do in the other performance of his that I covered that being as Longshanks in Braveheart, rejects once again that very proper and dignified voice he has. Instead this time McGoohan takes upon a voice that might be best described as a bit jazzy in style, though this actually is an effective choice once again by McGoohan as his normal voice make make Johnnie's intentions a bit too obvious. The voice McGoohan gives him makes him seem more at home in the Jazz world depicted in All Night Long, even if his intentions as a man make him more fitting of the cutthroat world that Othello is usually set in.

His choice of accent also helps set up Johnnie Cousin, as old honest Johnnie for most of the people in the room that night, though it seems everyone should be trusted anyway as everyone seems pretty supportive of each other at the start, except for old Johnnie who has plans of his own. McGoohan is quite good in putting on the most obvious of Johnnie's faces, the one he shows to everyone except for his wife and for a brief moment Delia. McGoohan plays it kind of a sly snake though just slick enough that his act does not become too obvious to seem false. McGoohan brings upon this certain eagerness about Johnnie as though everything he says is only in the service of the person he's telling it to. This is pivotal in making sense of Johnnie's specific abilities in the film since his method technically would not work with a lesser performer. The method being that Johnnie basically tells the person a problem in their life in an semi indirect way, while at the same time encouraging them to do something rash in an equally indirect way. McGoohan keeps this indirectness so well through his performance as he makes it as though Johnnie always seems detached from the negativity as though he has only stumbled upon gossip that he's so genuinely concerned about, then there is this encouraging quality in his voice as though his suggestions to do wrong seem like the right thing to do.

Now this version though does give a specific reason for his manipulations unlike Iago where there are only allusions. Again this easily could have taken away something form Johnnie as a character if it were not once again for McGoohan's terrific performance. McGoohan actually cleverly does not allow for the limitation of Johnnie just wanting to get Delia as a singer, as McGoohan does not portray this as what is exactly driving him. Instead McGoohan is excellent by making Johnnie perhaps even more despicable by showing a different motivator beneath the surface, fitting for a man who is just a man of faces. McGoohan gives a more sadistic edge to Johnnie, though in quite the compelling understated way. There's just this slightest hint of pleasure in the man as he sees his poisonous words work their way into each of his victims heads, and McGoohan suggests that witnessing their suffering is what truly compels Johnnie throughout the night. One of my favorite scenes of McGoohan's performance is his drum solo, which McGoohan makes more than just a man playing an instrument. McGoohan is brilliant as he attaches the solo to basically be what he is doing in the night, playing each person as he plays the instrument. McGoohan shows Johnnie truly relishing in the moment as he takes such horrible delight in being a puppet master that only results in pain for everyone other than himself.

Although many elements from Othello are simplified and softened in the adaptation, though I did not mind softening of some elements as I found myself feeling particularly sorry for Johnnie(Iago)'s victims in this version, McGoohan does his best to avoid this with his rendition of the Iago of Jazz music. McGoohan does not make Johnnie just an ambitious man who going to trick someone into allowing his band to come to fruition. McGoohan instead creates a fascinating villain with Johnnie through just how hollow of a man he is, as though there really isn't much past the mask he puts on. After Johnnie's deceit is discovered there remains one final scene for Johnnie after everyone has rejected except for his meek wife (Betsy Blair). The scene involves Johnnie's wife still indicating her love for him, while he rejects this which very easily could have been played as though Johnnie is just bitter after having lost his own potential chance at stardom. McGoohan though takes a far more interesting approach as though in the moment Johnnie's not being just his worst self, but his only true self. McGoohan makes Johnnie a void as he states essentially a disbelief in love, as there is such a disconcering lack of humanity in his words. Yes there is a palatable hate that McGoohan conveys but he does not present it as though it comes from just having lost his chance, but rather because he won't be able to inflict any more damage to those people around him. McGoohan gives a performance which enhances the film through his portrait of Johnnie Cousin, not as a jealous wannabe grasping for fame, but rather as a husk of man whose only joy comes from the torment of others. 

Alternate Best Actor 1962: Montgomery Clift in Freud

Montgomery Clift did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Sigmund Freud in Freud.

Freud tells the story of Sigmund Freud attempting to define his theories on the human mind, in which John Huston takes a somewhat strange approach to depict, as the proceedings have this edge of other worldly horror quality to them, although that might partially be because parts of the film's score would later be used in Alien.

Montgomery Clift gives his penultimate performance in a film here, and where his apparent damaged state often coincided with the nature of his characters after his accident, this is not exactly the case for Sigmund Freud, who is stable for the most part. Nevertheless Clift does seem right for the role, not that he wholly hides himself so to speak, but his work finds a way for these attributes to actually seem fitting to Freud's character in the film. Now Freud for the most part is a confident and healthy enough man who wishes to explore his own theories about illnesses that stem from the mind rather than the body, despite the scientific community giving little credence to these views, so the film is mainly about Freud's attempt to try to find the truth of the human mind through various test cases though the main focuses on a troubled young woman Cecily (Susannah York). Now Clift does not exactly try to reflect an exact copy of the real Freud, but his work instead tries to uncover the mind of such a man which seems rather fitting. Clift is able to position though Freud as a sort of soulful man in the way he interacts with his patients, even early on, and whenever he attempts to describe his beliefs.

Clift portrays very well this certain understated yet palatable passion in Freud to attempt to tap into whatever it is that exactly makes the mind work, as well what exactly the mind can reveal to discover past pains. Clift internalizes this incredibly well and in turn helps dial the film back a bit as Huston's direction sometimes does become a bit bombastic. Clift's performance often is reactionary and Clift never fails to make use of these reactions. Clift finds in Freud the right fascination as he brings this excitement in Freud at any given moment, particularly when it seems they might uncover something wholly new to the world in regards to the human psyche. This constant inquisitive nature of the man is very well realized by Clift's portrayal, but importantly Clift avoids making Freud become some sort of man who simply is interested in the suffering of others. Clift instead brings a powerful vein of empathy in his work as in his reactions there is not that distance of a scientist observing nature. Clift instead creates the sense of a man genuinely caring for these people's inner torments, and Clift helps amplify the intense emotions of any scene by showing Freud's own emotional exhaustion at delving into such dark places that are only found within the subconscious.

Although the film is called Freud, it rarely narrows in the man himself. There are a few scenes between him and his wife though they are only brief. To Clift's credit he is good in these scenes because he presents Freud in a less intense fashion, showing that the man is not always captured by his work. Oddly enough the more personal story almost seems to go to Freud's colleague played by Larry Parks. Freud's own psychological problem is found in the film through his troubled reaction to the death of his father. This element of the film is not deeply developed though, and even the conclusion is left on a quick silent note near the end of the film. Clift though is excellent in the brief scenes that cover this as he brings about such a haunting quality in his depiction that effectively represents Freud's own inner turmoil quite well. Even that quick final moment is actually a great moment for Clift because he does not simplify it as an easy fix, showing a bit of solace in Freud along with still a searing grief in reflecting on the relationship with his father once more. The majority of the film squarely keeps to Freud psychoanalyzing others, especially Cecily which the film uses as its dramatic climax as he seems to uncover exactly what troubles her so deeply. Clift makes this often passive act though so compelling to watch by making Freud's method never lose that personal connection in the moment, and in a way develops his technique by becoming specifically active in certain moments. This is a very strong performance by Clift as he artfully elevates the material while carefully avoiding its pitfalls. His portrait of Freud is an engaging one not through mannerisms or a form of imitation, but rather by finding the core that was the key to the emotional motivation of the man. 

Alternate Best Actor 1962

And the Nominees Were Not:

James Mason in Lolita

Toshiro Mifune in Sanjuro

Montgomery Clift in Freud

Robert Mitchum in Cape Fear

Tom Courtenay in The Loneliness of the Long Distance Runner

Rank Those Five or These Five:

James Stewart in The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance

Tatsuya Nakadai in Harakiri

Laurence Harvey in The Manchurian Candidate

Oskar Werner in Jules and Jim

Patrick McGoohan in All Night Long 

Or both. 

Alternate Best Actor 1928: Conrad Veidt in The Man Who Laughs and Buster Keaton in Steamboat Bill Jr. Best Supporting Actor 1928: William Powell in The Last Command and Results

Conrad Veidt did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Gwynplaine in The Man Who Laughs.

The Man Who Laughs is an effective film about a man surgically deformed to have a constant smile.

A silent actor already not allowed to speak to give life to their character, but Conrad Veidt is technically given even more of a limitation than usual in his portrayal of the titular character. Veidt is not only not allowed not to speak a large portion of his face is already made up for him. That being the constant smile representing the deformity given to his character as an additional punishment for his own father, who was executed, for refusing to recognize King James. A smile large and purposefully grotesque which would ended up becoming inspiration for the creation of the Joker. Despite what the central character looks like, and the villain this film would help to create this is not a horror film, and Gwynplaine is most certainly not a monster. In fact this is not even a case in which his deformity causes people to really mistake him for one since Gwynplaine ends up becoming a clown. In this way the physicality of the performance is not the focal point exactly like say it would later be for Boris Karloff in Frankenstein, as Gwynplaine is a normal man besides what a surgeon did to him. The idea behind the character is past the smile and this presents an intriguing challenge for Veidt to over come with his performance.

Now even though the physical element I still would not say is the most striking part of his performance it still is well worth noting that Veidt's use of his physical presence. Although not a monster Veidt does not exactly carry himself as a wholly normal man either as there is something quite special about the way he physically performs the part. Veidt is someone who is marvelous in terms of making his body language come across the screen and with this as Veidt shows the way Gwynplaine interacts with people. This is this retired restrictive quality that Veidt shows as though he wants to avoid direct exposure with them as he knows what to expect from their reaction. Even in the moments where he is performing as a clown Veidt is tremendous in portraying this hesitation in his physical manner as though he is in a way fighting against his own popularity which seems to come from the crowd's fascination with his smile. Now the one person this is not the case for is the blind woman Dea (Mary Philbin), though Veidt does something fascinating with this well. When they are just interacting in general there is a greater warmth in Veidt's interactions with her depicting his honest nature as a man, but not when she is presenting her love to him directly which then again Veidt has Gwynplaine cower as though once again he is hiding from his own disfigurement, which he's sure would prevent any woman from loving him.

Now what's incredible is that physical element of his performance is not the most notable aspect of Veidt's work here, there is something else, although most of his face is covered by that smile his eyes are as free as any man's. Now the eyes are often the easiest place to spot a silent over actor as absurd bug eyes was too often the standard setting for many actors during the era. This can even be seen in Cesare Gravina's performance as Gwynplaine's caretaker, who always seems a bit surprised by everything at all times. The eyes though are the center of Veidt's work and this is masterstroke of his performance as so brilliantly uses it to reveal the man behind the "laugh". There is so much humanity that Veidt brings out of his eyes that is is absolutely heartbreaking to watch him in the film because of the sheer emotion that Veidt brings in just the top half of his face like that. The moments of sadness, as Gwynplaine is continually seen only for his smile and he starts to feel as though no one could see past that, are so palatable because of that heartbreak Veidt so well realizes in every torn look and tear. It's an astonishing performance in the way that Veidt makes the audience always see the man as the emotions from him are so keenly felt because he always offers as access to the very soul of the man that Gwynplaine is, not the freak he is mistaken for. The performance it reminds me most of is John Hurt's work in The Elephant Man, both actors are severely limited in that they must be covered to represent what so many see their characters as in the story. The beauty of the portrayals of Hurt and Veidt as their respective characters is that using the little they have they force we the audience to see what the others could not, the man not the monster. 

Buster Keaton did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying William Canfield, Jr. in Steamboat Bill Jr.

Steamboat Bill Jr. is an enjoyable comedy about the son of a captain who fails to live up to his steamboat captain father's expectations due to his meek demeanor and the fact that he's romantically involved with his chief rival's daughter.

Buster Keaton is most often compared to Charlie Chaplin obviously since they were both silent comedians, but also because they both frequently directed their films as well. It is interesting to compare their styles as both a director and an actor, and they certainly hold similarities in terms of the materiel. Both of them would stare as a fairly unassuming man who would fall into some absurd situation often in some way associated with his love interest. Now an obvious difference is found in Keaton being a tad more informal in terms of the character, Chaplin was most often the Tramp, whereas Keaton had less defined of a comical character. He did not have an exact suit nor was he made up in the way Chaplin was, and the defining element was the fact that it was Buster Keaton. As directors their films, although I must admit I've currently seen less of Keaton, often have a similair set up to get to the physical gags, though Keaton's approach is in way more realistic than Chaplin's more romantic approach. That's not to say the gags are not as absurd, but there is something grittier about them, as the danger often seems more real, perhaps because it was as Keaton really was simply standing in place as the whole front of a house fell around him in this film.

This carries over in a way to their separate performances as Chaplin would be grander in a certain way in regards to his character's emotions, as well as even with some of the gags seemed more apart of them in a different fashion than Keaton's approach. Keaton again is much more low key in his approach taking a rather dead pan approach, not quite the usual dead pan of indifference rather this sorrowful simple expression that is most often seen across his face. Keaton manages to derive this charm from just his whole sad sack manner that ends up being quite endearing while working particularly well, in technically the center of the film, that being the physical comedy. Again with Keaton there is something less exact, though most certainly was perhaps even more exact than Chaplin when filmed, in the gag sequences than Chaplin who often times there were specific moments where the Tramp was supposed to be performing within the film.

With Keaton his character usually is forced into the physical madness, which Keaton also makes incredibly funny in how off the cuff it feels within the film which is always aided to by his facial and physical reactions which always keep that meekness that makes it seem all the more haphazard and amusing. Now with Steamboat Bill Jr. I'll admit that it does not quite muster up the poignancy of some of Chaplin best efforts, although I quite preferred this film as well as Keaton's work than Chaplin's own film from 28 The Circus. That is not to say that Keaton purely aims for laughs, sine he does spend enough time to develop something in terms of father and son relationship as well as the romantic one. Neither are anything too substantial though still well realized in their own modest way. It is more than enough to in a way insulate the comic the moments with a certain dramatic pull, and for Keaton to be both a hero we can invest in while just being a guy with laugh at.

Overall Rank Lead Actor:

1. Conrad Veidt in The Man Who Laughs
2. Erich von Stroheim in The Wedding March
3. Emil Jannings in The Last Command
4. Louis Wolheim in The Racket 
5. James Murray in The Crowd
6. Jean Debucourt in The Fall of the House of Usher
7. Buster Keaton in Steamboat Bill Jr. 
8. Warner Baxter in In Old Arizona
9. George Bancroft in The Docks of New York
10. Charles Chaplin in The Circus
11. Charles Farrell in Street Angel
12. Thomas Meighan in The Racket
13. Edmund Lowe in In Old Arizona

William Powell in The Last Command. The supporting cast is not always one where one would find great supporting performances in silent films simply as too many often reverted to that bug eyed expression, or they just were to unremarkable to come across the screen without actually saying anything. Powell, who made his name soon afterwards as an actor for the talkies, does make an impression within the limitations of silence. I won't say Powell is 100% without the occasional indulgence of just a bit of ham to be found, but he does not allow it to define his whole performance. Powell plays a man in the flashback sequences of the film who in turn suffers a bit of the wrath of the Russian General Sergius Alexander (Emil Jannings).  What's great is the sardonic king of the 30's is able to even get across quite a bit that trademark snark without even speaking a word. Even the two phases of it with at first the young man with a chip on his shoulder trying to act tough against a man of great power. Then in the present scenes Powell brings it with the confidence of a man well in charge as a successful film director who plans to humiliate that very same General by putting him in his film. Powell is so enjoyably smug and it's interesting to see him be able to bring that across so well without even use that great voice of his. This isn't a large role though Powell manages to make an nice impact, he even manages to see the extremely quick reversal of his character fairly well all things considered. It's a good performance from Powell that rises far above the the frequently forgettable performances by many of the minor players in silent films.

Supporting Top Ten:

1. William Powell in The Last Command
2. Lionel Barrymore in Sadie Thompson
3. Eugène Silvain in The Passion of Joan of Arc
4. Ernest Torrence in Steamboat Bill Jr.
5. Lars Hanson in The Wind
6. Montagu Love in The Wind
7. Lewis Stone in A Woman of Affairs
8. George E. Stone in The Racket 
9. Tom McGuire in Steamboat Bill Jr.
10. Bert Roach in The Crowd

Next Year: 1962 Lead

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1995: Results

5. Gene Hackman in Get Shorty - Hackman gives an effortlessly amusing performance as he manages to make an unscrupulous movie producer rather endearing.

Best Scene: Harry tries to act tough.

4. Don Cheadle in Devil in a Blue Dress -Cheadle takes his time to appear but once he does he steals the show with his magnetic turn as a trigger happy sidekick.

Best Scene: A drunk Mouse.

3. Sam Neill in Restoration - Neill gives a properly grand, and entertaining performance that so well represents the lovable rouge that Charles II needs to be.

Best Scene: Charles sets everything right.

2. Kevin Spacey in Seven - Spacey gives a great performance in realizing the "other worldly" preacher the killer believes he is, but also brilliantly undercuts it by also finding the real hate filled psychopath beneath it all.

Best Scene: The Box.

1. Patrick McGoohan in Braveheart - McGoohan, playing a far less likable King than Charles, also brings the larger than life gravitas, but along with it considerable menace in his depiction of the cruel Longshanks. 

Best Scene: The battle of Falkirk.

Overall Rank:

1. Angus Macfadyen in Braveheart
2. Patrick McGoohan in Braveheart
3. Kevin Spacey in Seven
4. James Cromwell in Babe
5. Sam Neill in Restoration
6. Don Cheadle in Devil in a Blue Dress
7. David O'Hara in Braveheart
8. Gene Hackman in Get Shorty
9. Raymond J. Barry in Dead Man Walking
10. William Hurt in Smoke
11. David Strathairn in Dolores Claiborne
12. Ben Stiller in Heavyweights
13. Sam Waterston in Nixon 
14. Forest Whitaker in Smoke
15. Joaquin Phoenix in To Die For 
16. Harvey Keitel in Smoke
17. Alan Rickman in Sense and Sensibility 
18. Ian Bannen in Braveheart
19. Sean Bean in GoldenEye 
20. Jim Broadbent in Richard III
21. Viggo Mortensen in Crimson Tide
22. Harold Perrineau in Smoke
23. Ian McKellen in Restoration
24. Jeremy Irons in Die Hard With a Vengeance
25. Alan Cumming in GoldenEye
26. Brendan Gleeson in Braveheart
27. Gary Sinise in Apollo 13
28. Tim Roth in Rob Roy
29. Kevin Bacon in Apollo 13
30. Gene Hackman in Crimson Tide 
31. James Woods in Casino 
32. Benicio Del Toro in The Usual Suspects
33. Paul Freeman in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie
34. Jonathan Hyde in Jumanji 
35. Pete Postlethwaite in The Usual Suspects
36. John Hurt in Rob Roy
37. Danny DeVito in Get Shorty
38. James Woods in Nixon 
39. Matt Dillon in To Die For
40. Leland Oser in Seven
41. Brian Cox in Rob Roy
42. Dennis Farina in Get Shorty
43. George Dzundza in Crimson Tide 
44. Nigel Hawthorne in Richard III
45. Delroy Lindo in Get Shorty 
46. Andrew Keir in Rob Roy
47. Stephen Baldwin in The Usual Suspects
48. Tom Sizemore in Devil in a Blue Dress
49. R. Lee Ermey in Dead Man Walking
50. Frank Vincent in Casino
51. Colm Meaney in The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain 
52. Tomas von Brömssen in All Things Fair 
53. Robert Prosky in Dead Man Walking 
54. James Cosmo in Braveheart
55. David Thewlis in Restoration
56. Max von Sydow in Judge Dredd 
57. Christopher Plummer in Dolores Claiborne
58. Martin Sheen in The American President
59. Desmond Llewelyn in GoldenEye
60. Ian McDiarmid in Restoration
61. J.T. Walsh in Nixon 
62. Robert Downey Jr. in Richard III
63. R. Lee Ermey in Seven
64. Joe Don Baker in GoldenEye
65. Kevin Pollack in The Usual Suspects
66. Nick Wyman in Die Hard with a Vengeance
67. Michael Gough in Batman Forever 
68. Ernie Hudson in Congo
69. Cary-Hiroyuki Tagawa in Mortal Kombat
70. Chazz Palminteri in The Usual Suspects 
71. James Gandolfini in Get Shorty
72. Dan Hedaya in To Die For
73. Kenneth Griffith in The Englishman Who Went Up a Hill But Came Down a Mountain 
74. Robbie Coltrane in GoldenEye
75. Don Rickles in Toy Story  
76. Hugh Grant in Sense and Sensibility 
77. Nathaniel Parker in Othello
78. Ed Harris in Nixon
79. Kurtwood Smith in To Die For
80. Gottfried John in GoldenEye
81. Jim Varney in Toy Story
82. Michael J. Fox in The American President
83. Bradley Whitford in Billy Madison
84. Christopher Lambert in Mortal Kombat 
85. Hugh Grant in Restoration
86. Dennis Hopper in Waterworld
87. Tom Sizemore in Heat
88. John Ratzenberger in Toy Story 
89. David Ogden Stiers in Pocahontas
90. Trevor Goddard in Mortal Kombat 
91. Don Rickles in Casino
92. Jon Voight in Heat
93. Wallace Shawn in Toy Story
94. Val Kilmer in Heat
95. Cheech Marin in Desperado
96. Chris Cooper in Money Train 
97. Rob Lowe in Tommy Boy
98. Tom McGowan in Heavyweights
99. Darren McGavin in Billy Madison 
100. Linden Ashby in Mortal Kombat
101. Tim Curry in Congo 
102. Ian McNeice in Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls 
103. Jim Cummings in A Goofy Movie
104. Steve Buscemi in Desperado
105. F. Murray Abraham in Mighty Aphrodite
106. Rob Paulsen in A Goofy Movie
107. Donald Sutherland in Outbreak
108. Ed Harris in Apollo 13
109. Sean Connery in First Knight 
110. Morgan Freeman in Outbreak 
111. Bill Paxton in Apollo 13
112. Josh Mostel in Billy Madison 
113. Simon Callow in Ace Ventura: When Nature Calls
114. Charles S. Dutton in Nick of Time
115. Brian Dennehy in Tommy Boy
116. Samuel West in Carrington
117. David Alan Grier in Jumanji
118. Kevin Gage in Heat
119. Jon Polito in Bushwhacked
120. Rip Torn in Canadian Bacon
121. Rufus Sewell in Carrington
122. Ben Cross in First Knight 
123. Robert Blake in Money Train
124. Joaquim de Almeida in Desperado
125. Eric Bogosian in Under Siege 2: The Dark Territory 
126. Martin Short in Father of the Bride Part II
127. Alan Alda in Canadian Bacon
128. Christopher Walken in Nick of Time 
129. Steven Martini in Major Payne
130. B.D. Wong in Father of the Bride Part II
131. Bob Hoskins in Nixon
132. Johnny Yong Bosch in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie
133. George Wendt in Man of the House
134. Grant Heslov in Congo 
135. Brad Pitt in 12 Monkeys 
136. Eric Idle in Casper
137. Morris Chestnut in Under Siege 2: The Dark Territory 
138. Stephen Lang in The Amazing Panda Adventure 
139. Dan Aykroyd in Tommy Boy
140. Michael Rapaport in Mighty Aphrodite
141. Orland Brown in Major Payne
142. Joe Don Baker in Congo 
143. William H. Macy in Mr. Holland's Opus
144. Peter Gallagher in While You Were Sleeping
145. Joe Pantoliano in Bad Boys
146. George Newbern in Father of the Bride Part II 
147. Jay Thomas in Mr. Holland's Opus 
148. Steven Waddington in Carrington
149. Paul Sorvino in Nixon 
150. Charles S. Dutton in Cry, The Beloved Country
151. Steve Cardenas in Might Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie
152. David Yost in Mighty Morphin Power Rangers: The Movie
153. Victor Slezak in The Bridges of Madison County
154. Jim Carrey in Batman Forever
155. Tommy Lee Jones in Batman Forever 
156. Armand Assante in Judge Dredd
157. Rob Schneider in Judge Dredd
158. Quentin Tarantino in Desperado 
159. Michael Maloney in Othello
160. Chris O'Donnell in Batman Forever
161. Julian Sands in Leaving Las Vegas

Next Year: 1928

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1995: Gene Hackman in Get Shorty

Gene Hackman did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Harry Zimm in Get Shorty.

Get Shorty is an entertaining film about a mob enforcer Chili Palmer (John Travolta) attempting to make it in the movies which gets a bit complicated.

Gene Hackman plays the man who seems to potentially be Chili's "in" into the industry as a B-movie producer that Chili comes across due to the various debts the man owes. Now Hackman comes into the film, and instantly seems like he'll be a highlight of it just from the way he so earnestly ponders about what happened to the dog woman he's sleeping next to, though not sleeping with. Things only continue along this course for the rest of the film every time in which Hackman makes an appearance. Hackman interestingly does not really play Harry with much sleaze, though it would have been easy to see how the character could have gone that way, considering his shady dealings, and that some his actions are not exactly the most noble. Oddly enough Hackman plays Harry Zimm in a rather likable fashion, and it certainly would be easy enough for Hackman to go despicable since he's certainly quite good at that as well. Hackman instead plays Zimm with kinda of a twinkle of sorts in his eye as a wannabe Hollywood player himself, just the strange thing happens to be that Harry has managed to fairly successful in his making of B-movie creature features.

Hackman's performance is actually rather essential for Harry working as a character, or at least making much sense in his existence. Harry again is kinda sleazy in his own short cuts at getting ahead, as it does not even seem like he's above potentially selling someone else out, and obviously has difficulties with his own abundance of debts, yet Harry is indeed left standing by the end of the film with no one seeming to mind him in fact many seem to like him. Again this works because of Hackman's endearing portrayal of Harry with this certain constant energy of his presence. Hackman makes Harry very active with this whole up beat quality to him that is more inspiring than off-putting, as Harry is always trying to work some sort of angle which Hackman handles in with an engaging vigor about it. What's so good about this is that Harry not very good what he does, and Hackman is so much fun in basically putting a smile on Harry's face every time he falls flat on that same face with every foolish decision he makes. The audience and Chili probably should hate Harry for all his shenanigans, but due to the way that Hackman portrays them you never do, and it is convincing that Chili doesn't either.

Hackman is a hoot here and the remarkable thing is just how effortless Hackman is in achieving that. Hackman makes Harry a hilarious character yet there is never a time when Hackman seems to actively be trying for laughs, it always feels very much within what should be Harry's behavior in any given situation. This works so well because of how vividly Hackman manages to draw Harry as character. Hackman ends being funny just by making Harry be Harry, and his behavior just ends up being comedic gold. This is particularly needed for one part of the story where Harry deals with one of Chili's gangster associates. Harry tries to act tough with the guy over the phone, Hackman who certainly can be quite intimidating when he wants to be, is just wonderful in not being menacing in the least as Harry is all bluster in his attempt to be tough guy. This leads quite quickly to Harry being brutally beaten ending up with two broken hands as well as several bruises. This scene potentially could have messed up the film's tone but Hackman manages to maintain it by making the beaten Harry just so amusing, while in no way underplaying the amount of pain he suffered. Hackman just always finds the right approach for the material, and this is yet just another strong performance from the great actor.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1995: Patrick McGoohan, Angus Macfayden, and David O'Hara in Braveheart

Patrick McGoohan did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying King Edward "Longshanks" in Braveheart.

Patrick McGoohan's character and performance is on the opposite end of Mel Gibson's work as the Scottish hero William Wallace. Where Wallace is the romantic hero, fighting for love lost, and proper freedom, King Edward known as Longshanks in turn is a proper villain for such a man. This right down to directly wanting to undermine Wallace's desires as he wants to rule Scotland along with England as well as his first act in the film is to grant Prima Nocta to his nobles, giving them sexual rights to Scottish brides before their husbands. Now with that it must be said that Longshanks is not going to be the most subtly drawn character in the film, in fact if you don't know he's the villain by the first time you see him the film ensure that by making his first act, off screen, being the hangings of a large group of men and boys. This can be clearly seen within McGoohan's performance as well, who discards his usual very refined and deeper voice for something a bit more high pitched and thin suggesting a certain madness just in the sound itself, and instead of being dignified in his usual way there always seems to be just something a bit off in Longshanks is demeanor due to McGoohan's performance.

Now with that said this might very well be a love it or hate it performance as McGoohan throws caution to the wind going all out in depicting Longshanks as the villain, I would argue, the film needs, for the style it takes in delivering the epic story of William Wallace. It must not be a villain who just kinda seems like a guy whose not very nice, no he has to be the tyrant that becomes a personification of the evils of the English from the story. The funny thing is I always have known McGoohan best for his depiction of the Scarecrow/Dr. Syn in the Scarecrow of Romney Marsh(where he would probably make my actor line up that year if I could ever find the original film cut of it) where he played a masked hero fighting against a King of England. This time though he is the King, and an evil one at that, perhaps trying to be the most evil one, though in characters from films in 1995 itself he has some stiff competition from Richard III. Like Ian McKellen's work in that film, McGoohan embraces the evil to its fullest extent throwing himself into making Edward the foe worthy of our hero William Wallace. McGoohan goes about realizing the same sort of grandeur in his performance that is above the vile nature of mere mortals, this is an evil King after all, he has to take it to another level.

McGoohan oozes a palatable menace in his role as his eyes seem to suggest that Longshanks is merely holding back an even more deranged individual behind his regal composure. Even a glance from him seem to be a curse from him as there is nothing but a hateful disregard in him for all things other than himself. McGoohan is curiously unstable while being stable in his role. He keeps Longshanks for the majority of the film as a very sturdy and extremely imposing figure as his presence lords over any scene in which he appears. Within that though there is a unpredictable sort of intensity that perpetuates in any given scene as though the only thing that tempers Longshanks psychopathy is the his position as King, though improves his ability to harm others, because there rarely are moments where Longshanks is comfortable within himself. Even when he tells his original plan to breed out the Scots, and all his advisers agree, McGoohan produces such a venom as Longshanks bites back at their sycophantic behavior. McGoohan does not play Longshanks as a man who simply hates the Scots, or hates people who oppose his power. No, instead McGoohan portrays him as a man who hates everyone, and is most comfortable in the act of brutally killing his foes.

I rather love McGoohan's take of embracing the evil of Longshanks. I particularly enjoy the way he produces that nagging cough of Longshanks that grows throughout the film, that McGoohan makes a very unpleasant wheeze fitting for more of a monster than a man. Now it is far to argue that it is not exactly the most subtle approach, but there's times for subtlety as well as times to go for something a little bigger. McGoohan does this with his performance. Now that is not even to say there is not a certain complexity that McGoohan brings to the part. His character really has one true purpose, but I don't think it is still quite as thin as all that. McGoohan never makes it as though Longshanks is just of one mind, though his unsaid though most likely psychopathy is the motivating factor for the character that McGoohan establishes. In his scenes with his son, the weak willed Edward II, McGoohan depicts an accepted fear in Longshanks as he knows his son will not be able to keep his power, and there is a desperation that McGoohan depicts as Longshanks attempts to get his son to be the King he wants him to be. McGoohan does find variation within the evil King, and his successes in the film feel earned as McGoohan realizes so well the cunning of a King. He's excellent in the only scene where Longshanks is in battle, and McGoohan shows a man who is the absolute champion of the battlefield without raising an arm as he's already defeated Wallace before the battle began. McGoohan makes Longshanks the perfect villain for the film making his final scene so satisfying as McGoohan reveals almost the wretched insides of the man, as he is falling into a despair, while it appears all that he built in his time will splinter in his death.

Angus Macfadyen did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Robert the Bruce in Braveheart.

Now if one desires a more modestly drawn work look no further than Angus Macfadyen who plays a prominent Scottish noble who is the strongest contender to become King of Scotland. The story of Robert in the film is the most complicated journey for a character in the film, as Wallace is bent directly on one task freedom, Robert due to his position is forced to deal with the politics of Scotland more delicately. Macfadyen plays Robert with the appropriate charisma in his early scenes not as a clear hero like Wallace, but rather a more refined individual who probably is more suited for a long term leadership than a firebrand like Wallace. To complicate things even more for Robert is that he must deal with his perhaps even more ambitious father (Ian Bannen), who is suffering from leprosy and wants to see his son crowned King of Scotland. Macfadyen is very good in his scenes with Bannen as he portrays Robert's understanding, and willingness to heed his father's more compromising advice in a fashion that does not paint Robert as a fool, Macfadyen, and Bannen in the scenes realizes the two well as men who are thinking in a more complex fashion than most of the players in Scotland, and England, as the two show the men measuring every step of every other man in order to know exactly when and how to make their move.

Macfadyen though presents Robert as a man who makes his moves carefully, he importantly does also establish early on that he is more than just one of the other power or land hungry lords that we see in the rest of the film. In an early scene where Robert describes Wallace's efforts Macfadyen reveals a palatable desire to break out in a similair way to Wallace, and to join Wallace's cause. Of course his father's advice wins out, but Macfadyen keeps this as a understated factor in Robert as he conveys the similair sentiments that motivate Wallace though just no in not such an extroverted fashion. MacFadyen is excellent in the first scene where Robert and Wallace directly interact as Robert attempts to convince Wallace to compromise while Wallace tries to convince Robert not to. What's so strong about Macfadyen's performance is again he does not leave Robert just as this weaker soul who needs to be schooled by Wallace. Macfadyen does not allow this with his portrayal of Robert as he brings an genuine passion and manages to be quite persuasive in his attempts to make Wallace basically understand the more finer details when it comes to the control of power in a country. This makes it all the more earned in MacFadyen subdued though incredibly effective reaction as Wallace urges Robert to be the man he could be.

Of course other matters seem to dictate a different course as he takes his father's course instead and backs Longshanks during a battle with Wallace going so far as to even ride with Longshanks himself. Macfadyen realizes so well the heartbreak and guilt in Robert when Wallace confronts him directly, as Macfadyen does not just show him to be a mad saddened by the defeat of a man he admired, the death he allowed, but the most pain seems to come from the shame that he was not able to be the man Wallace believed he could be. Macfayden creates the intensity of Robert's despair powerfully by again having this undercurrent of that passion Robert desperately wants to embrace, though forces himself to deny due to continuing to follow his father's advice for compromise. Macfadyen never simplifies the conflict in Robert making his personal arc come to life which is pivotal to the film. Robert ends up being the insurance of the film in a way since Wallace's own story ends in rather tragic circumstances, which leaves only Robert left to fight for the freedom Wallace desired as well as the only person who can make the film an inspiring instead of depressing note.

This is all left to the final scene of the film which begins with Robert accepting his position as King, though with the stipulation that he will still bow down to English. Macfayden is outstanding in this scene in almost a completely silent moment as he effectively portraying Robert going over the decision in his mind, and seeming as he will possibly once again compromise. Then there is that moment of the choice that is so beautifully rendered as he has Robert finally become the man Wallace believed he could be. Macfadyen reveals the full fiery passion, that was always there, in Robert in his speech to the Scottish army. It is only nine words long but I actually find it to be the most rousing of all the speeches in the film, amplified so well by Macfadyden's eyes and voice as you can see that same spirit that fueled Wallace as Robert speaks the words "You have bled with Wallace. Now bleed with me.". Macfadyen is gives a great performance by creating such a poignant portrait, not of the romantic hero like Wallace who already has the will attempt to lead the people to freedom to begin with, but rather of a man who must gain the strength to become the hero who can accomplish Wallace's dream.

David O'Hara did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Stephen of Ireland in Braveheart.

Now let's go away from Kings to a soldier on a ground brought to life a character of a character actor David O'Hara, who can steal a scene so well that he stole a whole character away from an actor in about 10 minutes that another actor had eight different films to play. O'Hara here plays a late addition to Wallace's army after Wallace has made a name for himself through his various successful attacks against the English armies in Scotland. While once again David O'Hara puts character in character acting in his first appearance as he and another man arrive to join Wallace's campaign. Stephen though acts a bit differently than the other man who is just another Scot eager for freedom it seems. No Stephen hails from Ireland and inquires if joining Wallace will mean he can kill English. Stephen though seems to be at least a little off his rocker, though perhaps only in the way of a proper warrior poet. After all Stephen often engages in conversations with the almighty, considering God to be his only equal, does not mind referring to all of Ireland simply as his island, and one of his earliest acts is to threaten one of Wallace's men when they attempt question his sanity. Now such a character could easily becoming a bit too much and very could have a been a risk in the film, that risk was instantly squashed though through the casting of O'Hara.

O'Hara is so wonderfully demented in the role and manages to so well make Stephen form of insanity something quite endearing to behold. O'Hara brings so much just in those eyes of his which seem as sharp and piercing as the knife he most commonly brandishes, this goes along with a such a bright and wide smile only fitting for a man who converses with the creator, and just a laugh that is so well delivered by O'Hara as a glorious cackle only fitting for a true mad man. O'Hara, unlike the other two performances I have highlighted, does not really have any scenes to himself, he's rarely not in the presence of Wallace with usually something more important going one around him. What O'Hara instead has at his disposal are a series of moments strewn throughout the film. Whenever the film decides to cut to Stephen O'Hara never wastes a gesture or breath in offering whatever Stephen decides to add to the situation. Stephen always off a bit of off-kilter commentary in his brief moments that always stand out well thanks to O'Hara marvelous work, I've always particularly loved his little aside to Wallace when they're hunkered down due to arrows.

Any sequence in which Stephen appears gets an extra bit of color thanks to O'Hara who makes Stephen a constant source of entertainment. Now although O'Hara is a lot of fun in the role, but that is not all there is to his work. As Wallace's campaigns become less successful and as Edward begins to gain the upper hand O'Hara adjusts his performance appropriately, as Stephen becomes one of the few allies to Wallace to neither die or betray him. O'Hara matches the changing and darker tone of the film perfectly, without ever seeming out of place. In fact O'Hara ends up being quite moving in just offering very sympathetic and wholly genuine reactions to the worst moments particularly Wallace's torture. Now technically Stephen could be erased from the film and the film would go on, though as a whole it would be less. O'Hara's performance here is an example of just what a talented character actor can do.In just a bit of time sprinkled throughout the film O'Hara makes his impact, delivering in creating a memorable character out of a minor role that makes Braveheart a better film by his mere presence.