Alternate Best Actor 1987: Joe Mantegna in House of Games

Joe Mantegna did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Mike in House of Games.

House of Games I found to be David Mamet's best film, that I've seen, despite being his first film benefiting from a more focused narrative than some of his later efforts.

Mamet mainstay, both on stage on screen, Joe Mantegna naturally is there for the first foray into the cinematic form. A film that follows a subject matter, that being the world of con artists, that seems more fitting to sort of Mamet's mametese style of dialogue. The film explores the world of con artists through the curiosity of a doctor Margaret Ford (Lindsay Crouse) who initially comes upon the world in the belief she is helping one of her patients. Joe Mantegna appears as one of the first connections to the world seemingly as a gambler willing to help her patient wipe away a debt if she helps him play poker. Mantegna is of course a fine fit for such part fitting right into the underworld setting. Mantegna's performance though is interesting in it essentially him playing with the idea of just what type of criminal his Mike is throughout the film. At first we meet him seemingly as shady, but seemingly affable enough gambler. Mantegna captures a generalized sorta tough guy well enough that it becomes believable enough as he reveals a bit of seeming vulnerability in trying to get Margaret to help him win at poker. I will say this probably Mantegna's weakest scene as it is in general somewhat stilted, though this perhaps to show the artifice of the situation since the whole thing is revealed to be a con to try to scam Margaret.

She catches on though but rather than turning them into the police she becomes intrigued by the con men particularly Mantegna's Mike. Mantegna switches his performance accordingly to be a particularly amiable con man. Here Mantegna excels in bringing a real charm to his performance in expressing this outward warmth with an underlying attraction towards Margaret. He is particularly effective in creating the intrigue of the con by overlaying with this considerable charisma. Mantegna speaks with an energy and magnetism of a man trying not only to woo the woman but also to welcome her into the world. His whole manner delivers this eagerness to show off though in a way that captures her intrigue. Mantegna and Crouse share an earnestly sweet chemistry together even as they speak of essentially cheating other people. That mutual attraction is well realized though specifically created in the foundations of that sort of danger involving the con. Mantegna though seems to remain consistent as really her "man" even as they go along towards a more dangerous con that she invites her into. Mantegna plays these moments though with an earnest concern always towards her, almost a little too impassioned in her support to the point where one might question the loyalty based on just how selfless it appears.

The violent con ends up being yet just another con at Margaret's expense, a long con to get her money, and in this Mantegna segues towards his final turn as Mike, the real Mike. Mantegna here makes for a real proper jerk now just showing a completely callous criminal who is neither dangerous nor intriguing. Mantegna instead does well by just staying true to the nasty nature of the con and presents a man just without any scruples. Mantegna takes the approach that is pretty cold though effectively so in showing just how brutal the nature of the con is. This is as he shows not a hint of a hidden real affection showing quite bluntly instead that the Mike of all previously scenes was merely the con artist playing the part to rope her in. This made all the more evident in the final confrontation which is perhaps Mantegna's best scene. Mantegna doesn't beat around the bush brandishing the indifference of Mike right to her face with this venomous disregard in every line delivery. He leaves no moment for sentiment revealing just a small pathetic man behind all his false charm that really was just a mask. This is revealed all the more when she one ups him by resorting to violence for satisfaction. Mantegna is very good in revealing a genuine desperation while still keeping the man's vile nature intact as he captures a man clearly fearing for his life though with a pride that prevents him begging for it. It's a terrific moment as Mantegna reveals the little rat that was Mike all along. Now this though does create a structure for the character that keeps a distant type, rather than real man for much of the film. Nonetheless this is a good performance by Joe Mantegna even within that certain restriction.