Alternate Best Actor 2002: Olivier Gourmet in The Son

Olivier Gourmet did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning Cannes, for portraying Olivier in The Son.

The Son follows a carpenter instructor taking interest in one of his students at a rehab school.

The Dardenne brothers take a matter of fact approach in their film-making, though their actual subjects typically touch the melodramatic in terms of content though not in execution. We have that here as we have Olivier Gourmet portraying the character of Olivier. Now Gourmet is the directors' most frequent collaborator, though the sizes of his roles differ. This is his largest as the lead, and leading to the point that the directors essentially stay within Olivier's view almost throughout the film. Now the central crux of the film is a rather extreme one this as the boy that Olivier takes interest in was imprisoned originally for having killed Olivier's son in a robbery. Gourmet's performance is a curious and fascinating one. This as even with this knowledge his character is not one we can immediately understand. This is that he has no inner monologue and most of his spoken words a perfunctory. This as he largely talks about directly what he is doing as a carpenter rather than revealing anything about himself. This then leads us to examine Gourmet's work which essentially must create so much of the film's drama, almost all of it through his mostly silent performance. This as we immediately see him it appears he might just be a rather firm and tough teacher. This with a sense of conviction in his manner of a good teacher though with a force about him particularly as he speaks to the certain boy Francis.

This is though as we follow him it is obviously not just any normal student as he not only demands that the student spend more time with him in the school, we follow Olivier as he follows him around. Gourmet though is incredible in the way his manner is a whole lot of things at once in these scenes of following the boy around. There is firstly the weight of his expression that bares a grief that is unspoken but obviously within him. There is the awkwardness of a man essentially being a stalker without really the ability or manner appropriate for such an act. This in as he moves around in fidgeting and nervous way. Gourmet's performance emphasizes that while the man is doing this, there probably is not an assured sense of why he is doing this. There is though in that a strange conviction about it, an intensity that Gourmet brings. This intensity that is particularly well realized as it is not of some traditional revenge seeker, but rather a man with a sense of confusion and though also hate in intensity. We see this stalking inter-spliced with the moments of just Olivier teaching. There he's terrific in showing the man more so in his normal state where he offers almost even a warmth just in the manner in which he attempts to show the boy the methods of his craft. This though even there is still the sense in his eyes the man's focus upon the boy that obviously isn't normal.

We are not told Olivier's plan, even when called upon it, Gourmet accentuates the confusion and more than anything an inability to speak in the moment. This naturally intensifies when he takes Francis on a road trip to pick up wood, and this extended sequence is tremendous work from Gourmet. This as Gourmet's, again basically silent, performance takes us through the steps in his mind as he looks upon the boy. There is a great moment where he takes almost a instinctual attack by stopping the car short. In the moment Gourmet's eyes just intensifies for a second showing it as this almost subconscious moment. Through the trip though inter-spliced between questions about craft Olivier does ask about the boy's crimes. Gourmet delivers this so well with a calm understatement of just man conversing with the troubled boy, though again with his eyes he finds the nuance of someone looking for answers. Eventually he takes the boy to the secluded supply area where Olivier suddenly reveals his connection to the boy as the father of his victim. I love Gourmet's delivery again even in this is almost random as though his mind has just pulled this from him. We see the same as he then attempts to chase the boy who naturally runs upon hearing this. Gourmet is fantastic by how natural he makes the complete chaos he displays in Olivier's "plan". This as he speaks that he won't hurt the boy wholly earnestly, however it is with a real intensity that when he does catch the boy he begins to choke him. Gourmet's performance makes sense of the senseless essentially, as any behavior is given a truth about it by showing the man's mind as randomly trying to come to a personal conclusion on his wound. The problem is there is no real solution. Gourmet is incredible as Olivier doesn't kill the boy, however immediately afterwards his whole scene of breathing alone says so much. This as Gourmet is searing with the sense of anger still in the man even as the man returns to essentially his life by preparing the wood again. The final moment is essential in this as when the boy returns, his look is not one of forgiveness but rather we see a man choosing to move forward. This is a truly striking performance as Olivier Gourmet work create an honesty in a man basically being senseless in reacting to senselessness. He avoids being vague, but rather finds something truly powerful in a man wandering around trying and failing to figure out what to do.

Alternate Best Actor 2002: Leslie Cheung in Inner Senses

Leslie Cheung did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Jim Law in Inner Senses.

Inner Senses is a spooky, if sloppy, little ghost story about a woman, after being haunted in her apartment, going to her therapist for help.

This sadly marks the final performance of Leslie Cheung, who unfortunately committed suicide about a year after the release of this film. I will say my own, limited, exposure to Cheung places his tragic passing not in the middle of a phase like it is with so many actors, but rather the beginning of a new one. This is as all the other performances of his that I've seen emphasized a youthful vibe, this even in Happy Together, where he was nearly in his 40's yet came off in his early 20's still. Here however he looks like a man of his 40's, and not in a bad way, as we first see him giving a seminar on ghosts. Cheung is wholly comfortable here, even if almost say him as an entirely different actor, in presenting a middle aged man. This with a quiet assured quality as he rattles off a ghost encounter before dismissing it and the overall concept as a false perception of the mind. Cheung effectively exuding that sort of slight pompousness of a college professor though with the right degree of charisma not feel like a blowhard. When the woman Cheung Yan (Karena Lam) comes to him with her ghost problem, Cheung reacts effectively as a caring yet dismissive psychiatrist regarding the claim. He finds the right balance in that he grants the empathy to the distress of the woman well his eyes also suggest the certain indifference to the claim, suggesting the man quite assured in his lack of beliefs regarding ghosts.

As Yan continues to seek his help, as her counters continue, Cheung naturally increases that sense of empathy towards her. This as he continues to present and speak in a calmly reassuring way, through that of consistent denial towards the existence of the ghosts. This though slowly developing into a more romantic chemistry which I like that Cheung doesn't overplay. This in making sort of a natural flirtation based on his natural charm more so than any overt, potentially creepy attempt, to seduce her. When her condition doesn't improve to the point of severe depression he has her committed. Cheung's portrayal of this is important in the film as even though he presents being comfortably distant in the moment, earnestly as to not encourage her from trying to romantically with him, his eyes still appropriately emphasize the empathy even within that situation. The only problem is Law himself begins to see the ghosts as well. This where Cheung's performance naturally loses that self confidence and ego. This rather falling into just a fear in which he work portrays someone being wholly crippled in his stricken manner and horrified expression. This to the point that his character shocks himself in some futile attempt to end the haunting. This naturally leading himself to believe Yan and actively try to solve the problem without just simply doubting it.

This leading first to a frankly terrible love montage scene that is tonally out of whack with the rest of the film, however Cheung makes his way through it without any issue of his own. This in more than anything granting the sense of connection between the characters, as Law seems to solve Yan by connecting her with her past traumas by reuniting her with her parents. The ghosts continue to haunt Law though and Cheung's performance captures with it the emotional exasperation as the pressures mounts against him. This creating a sense of a devastating depression that seems to form as he begins to realize who the ghost is, a girlfriend who had committed suicide in the past after he had broken up with her. This leading to final confrontation with the ghost through sadly with an eerie connection to Cheung's actual death, as we see Law face this on top of a building where the ghost wants him to jump off. Even forgetting that unfortunate connection to the man's actual reality, Cheung is devastating in the sequence. This in presenting so bluntly the real grief of the man filled with a real anguish and shame as he attempts to apologize for his previous actions, though without taking the next step of killing himself for them. Cheung finding a reality within the personal connection of the scene with a powerful portrayal of the man dealing with the sins of the past. This is a strong performance from Leslie Cheung, even if unfortunately his last, as it suggests he had potential a new phase of his career in store. This in his performance here shows a different side of him, a maturity in his moving portrayal of a man dealing with his past literally haunting him.

Alternate Best Actor 2002: Greg Kinnear in Auto Focus

Greg Kinnear did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Bob Crane in Auto Focus.

Auto Focus tells the life story of Hogan's Heroes star Bob Crane.

Auto Focus is one of the many films by Paul Schrader depicting a man living on a kind of a razor's edge, This being unique in the story is built around a at one time particularly public figure in Bob Crane. At the center of it we have some brilliant casting in Greg Kinnear in the lead role. This is as Greg Kinnear is a particularly earnest performer which is an ideal match for Bob Crane who was much the same. This creates an ease in creating really what is first the public persona that Bob Crane was initially known for. This being sort of the 50's easy going any man. Kinnear has this done pat of course as his own manner and delivery is with that same casual seeming sincerity. Kinnear from the outset does something important in creating the right hint of nuance in creating Bob Crane the star and Bob Crane the man even in a wholly public situation. This as Crane wasn't exactly a great actor and in the brief performance scene Kinnear emphasizes just the breezy easy going quality. This is similar, though not exactly the same, as we see Bob at home with his first wife (Rita Wilson). Kinnear emphasizes a sort of straight forward gee whiz early 60's straight forward sitcom dad. He doesn't overplay it though finding the right sort of place as this being the guy in a way in the way he speaks and his general manner. This as basically his foundation as a person in terms of his behavior, affected to a degree, though not to the degree as Hogan. This in showing the man created by expectation which Kinnear plays well with that earnestness of his as is basically who Crane technically is, but only as a sort of general presentation of self.

Kinnear handles this setup well creating the right balance in giving us the sitcom guy, from a certain sitcom era, though with enough of a sense of reality beneath the surface, that beneath that the film will come to explore. This begins as Kinnear meets video equipment specialist John Henry Carpenter (Willem Dafoe) who introduces him to the world of strip clubs...as a starter. I think the exploration of is where the essential element of Kinnear's performance, that really twists the film in a certain way, an effective way for this story. This as Kinnear doesn't portray his typical manner as this facade, but rather the way the man goes through life. This in not being overly charming, or overly anything else. Rather he presents a man who just gets by at being likable enough. Kinnear playing the part earnestly as this, that in turn actually creates a particularly disturbing quality as Crane begins to engage in this underbelly. This as Kinnear plays this with the same earnestness despite technically the extreme contrast it holds against the seemingly wholesome image his presence suggests. This is to the point he even recounts these initial visits to his priest, not as a confession, with the same wry smile. Kinnear portrays it appropriately in turn as this compulsion within Crane. Although moments of hesitation are there, Kinnear depicts these moments not as breaking exactly a facade but rather the man experiencing life as himself. The disconnect being found between the values of the life and the way the man seems to present himself. Kinnear makes it unnerving by portraying just as the public saw him, but in turn we see what he was doing outside of that public life.

Kinnear in turn shows as Crane goes further into the life, which involves affairs, orgies, pornography and sex tapes, we see a man who largely isn't battling against himself, more of the image we have of him. This in presenting the confidence of self in any of these scenarios, and makes the juxtaposition created by this quietly disturbing. This amplified by Kinnear's performance as he plays Crane so purely this even as the man names every euphemism for breasts and how he loves him, he delivers as he would selling a commercial in a carefree commercial. Crane's descent then is a little atypical for a Schrader film, though it still shows a man falling off that edge as expected, the nature of it is a bit different as realized in Kinnear's performance. This as Kinnear strictly portrays Crane as lacking in self-awareness regarding the duality of his life. This as his compulsion pushes him, which Kinnear as earnestly depicts as a fixation towards sex, however at the same time without the sense of what this really means for how others perceive him. What we see though is the sort of separation becomes all the thinner. Again though in Kinnear's performance it never is as two men, but rather his fixation bleeds into his persona. Kinnear delivers with this the sense of desperation in the man both in granting a sense of exasperation in his eyes but also a frustrated physical manner. This as Kinnear still projects a man who thinks he can get by that casual confidence of his though even as his vices become all the more apparent. This as Kinnear's performance becomes grotesque for a lack of a better word. Not grotesque in way that breaks the reality of the man, but rather expresses the oddity of this guy who thinks he can just give an easy smile, while everything else about him expresses an intense anxiety and dissatisfaction with his life. "Hogan" merges with the sex crazed man in Kinnear's work that again is unnerving by granting something genuine to the seeming contradiction. Again this has a particular power through Kinnear's own presence, that makes a man who complains about dirty jokes and talks about editing sex tapes in front of son in the same sentence honest. In turn his descent doesn't involve a revelation rather the lack of one. This as we see Crane belittle his partner-in-crime Carpenter, it is with that same unshakable confidence in Kinnear's even as the rest of the man seems in a state of deterioration. Kinnear delivers a terrific performance here not by only subverting his presence or even Crane's, but rather merging that contradiction that creates the unusual downfall of the man. 

Alternate Best Actor 2002

And the Nominees Were Not:

Leslie Cheung in Inner Senses

Chiwetel Ejiofor in Dirty Pretty Things

Bill Paxton in Frailty

Hiroyuki Sanada in The Twilight Samurai

Sol Kyung-gu in Oasis

Predict Those Five, These Five Or Both:

Greg Kinnear in Auto Focus

Olivier Gourmet in The Son

Philip Seymour Hoffman in Love Liza

David Gulpilil in The Tracker

Timothy Spall in All or Nothing

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1966: Results

5. Donald Pleasence in Fantastic Voyage - Pleasence is the best part of his film, doing his best to make the most out of some pretty vague ideas.

Best Scene: Claustrophobia.

4. Paul Meurisse in Le Deuxième Souffle - Meurisse gives a nice spirited turn in creating the methods of an intelligent investigator.

Best Scene: Analyzing the crime scene.

3. Murray Hamilton in Seconds - Hamilton, in some very brief time, gives a very moving portrayal of a journey that reflects the central one, just in a microcosm.

Best Scene: His scene.

2. John Randolph in Seconds - Randolph gives a powerful setup for the main character of his film, in giving a moving portrayal of a man gripped by an anxiety and detachment from his life.

Best Scene: Reflecting on his life.

1. Will Geer in Seconds - Good predictions Mitchell Murray, RatedRStar, Calvin, Michael Patison and Razor.  Will Geer gives a brilliant portrayal. This in subverting his typical folksy manner to create a particularly unnerving portrayal of a man giving some loving wisdom that is wholly nihilistic.

Best Scene: Sendoff.

Updated Overall

Next: 2002 Lead

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1966: Donald Pleasence in Fantastic Voyage

Donald Pleasence did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Dr. Michaels in Fantastic Voyage.

Fantastic Voyage follows an attempt to save a man from an assassination attempt by shrinking down and entering his body.

Fantastic Voyage is really what you can qualify as a bad effects driven picture, not that the effects are bad for the time, it probably was deserving of its Oscar there, but in its approach to an effects driven film. This is as the effects are basically all there is to the film. This with the ever frustrating inconsistent career of Richard Fleischer, who made a wonderful effects driven film in 20,000 Leagues Under the Sea, but here makes a rather tepid one. This was because in that earlier film it was only part of it, he spent time on the stories, spent time with the characters both in terms of having fun and in terms of creating a dramatic arc within the film, while also making use of his actors. Here we actually do have a cast filled with characters actors who gave good to great performances elsewhere, but here mostly saddled with bland cardboard cutouts who just need to recite exposition after exposition. I guess though a film like this is almost a challenge to the performers to try to make something out of almost nothing, while then leave it to the best actor in the cast to make a go of it. That of course being Donald Pleasence who appears as one of the scientist in charge of the operation, Dr. Michaels. Pleasence tries to make an impression even in his boring exposition through his overly detached way of speaking that riffs on it a bit to grant the sense of Michaels as seeming to examine the situation in a curious situation.

Pleasence even in the very boring scenes of preparing for the trip and the slow shrinking scene, tries to add to something through that penetrating glare here. This that he slowly tips it towards insanity before Michaels has brief outburst claiming he has claustrophobia. Although not really treated with much of anything within the film, you get that classic Pleasence gravitas as he describes having been covered by debris in England during the war. Pleasence is fantastic in the way he can bring emotion to the line while still speaking in the detached way he takes to Michaels. It is almost a trick he pulls as he doesn't even break his voice yet his eyes create a sense of some idea of an anxiety within the man in the moment. A brief moment that has no real followup other than to indicate early on that Michaels is the saboteur as things begin to go wrong with the mission. Pleasence then becomes at first a man constantly doubting the mission with a nefarious intensity in his voice. This doesn't go really far at all other than allowing Pleasence getting to act evil a bit. He does it well of course, but sadly even as a villainous turn it doesn't give him much to sink his teeth into. He though does his best to make the most out of it. This even in his final scene in facing the body's internal defense system closing in on him, where Pleasence portrays some genuine fear in attempting to create a real reality to the ludicrous situation. Sadly though all this does not add up to nearly enough. None of the ideas really are given any further detail beyond just a vague idea.  Having said all that though Pleasence gives a good performance by running as far as he can with those vague ideas, this is as he is definitely the best of the cast and is actually by far the best thing about the film.

Alternate Best Actor 1966: Rock Hudson & John Randolph in Seconds

Rock Hudson nor did John Randolph receive Oscar nominations for portraying Arthur Hamilton, though later known as Antiochus "Tony" Wilson, in Seconds.

Seconds is an excellent film about a man getting offered a strange opportunity to be "reborn" and given a new chance at a life.

The film begins with a man receiving a random address by a stranger in public who quickly departs. The man being a middle-aged banker played by John Randolph. We follow this man from this initial interaction and already from that Randolph's performance suggests a man of near constant anxiety. This as his whole physical being is both tight and fidgeting. There is an lack of wellness that permeates from Randolph's performance so effectively creates the state of the man. His expression alone, even when nothing is going on yet, has this terrible baseless paranoia as he sits alone as man who is entirely discontent with his own being. An intelligent touch is when he arrives initially back home to his wife, he loses that anxiety, at least overtly, as he speaks to his wife. This with a smile towards her. There is a somewhat detached quality within it as he speaks every little interaction with a care, but not a passion within the discussion. This against as we see him thinking about at home for a phone call, that is from his old friend named Charlie with a strange offer. Randolph captures this powerful combination between a gripping fear and a fascination within the call. This suggesting the hook the offer Charlie is offering for him, is painfully within him. Again though there is a brief tender moment with his wife that really is essential I feel. This as there is the potential for more, but Randolph still grants this distance in Arthur as he refuses to directly connect. This again as though he is lost.

We then follow Randolph as Arthur decides to take up Charlie's offer by following a labyrinthine route to get to the organization that will provide him a service. Randolph's performance granting this sort of of journey an essential reality. This in portraying again both a sense of fear within the prospect but also being quietly intrigued. This until he arrive at the organization where the first thing that happens to him is he is drugged and placed in a purposeful scenario by the organization to blackmail him into proceeding forward with their procedure. After he's regained his composure Randolph is terrific in his attempt in portraying initially the man in any way acting as in control himself. This in speaking with just a minor front to control himself, while his eyes allude towards the still sense of confusion within the man's sudden predicament. His performance though is one that slowly wavers against the man's suggestion to a nearly petrified state, until they show him footage of their staged video to blackmail him with a proposed sexual assault. Randolph is incredible by showing the horror upon seeing his sudden state, until a final conversation from the head of the organization the old man (Will Geer), who tempts him with the prospect of "rebirthing" via changing himself physically while disposing of his old life with a crafted new one for him. As the old man prompts him about what it is that Arthur has, Randolph is heartbreaking as his expression is that hollowness sense of  man's life and that anxiety exuding from his every pore. His attempts at explanation to defend himself delivered with either a weak resolve or an entirely heartbreaking emotional exhaustion. Randolph essentially speaks every word of a man condemning his own state, without a single hint of love or tenderness in examining himself. Randolph showing someone who has given himself wholly to pessimism,in turn wholly giving himself to the treatment of being reborn. 

Of course then Arthur undergoes an operation where Randolph exists the film as the man becomes Rock Hudson through the changes done by the organization. Although seemingly ideal for the part of the idealized version of a man to become through an operation, this actually is a rather alien part for Hudson. Hudson who was far better known for his straight forward leading men turns, or his lightweight romcom turns. This is neither of those, and this is pretty evident from his very first scene where we see Arthur seeing his new face, while still being prepared. Hudson immediately shatters one's usual image of him from this scene alone as we see a man completely ill at ease with himself in this moment. This as Hudson's eyes suggest a deep fear upon looking at his new face, and his whole manner is as a man who is completely in discomfort with himself. Hudson though in this sense also continues where Randolph left off with his performance, but now also showing a man with that same anxiety within his own physicality. Hudson's performance showing a man who is unable essentially to be himself in the moment since he's not himself. Hudson in this moment grants a strict, and rather powerful reality to the technically sci-fi concept, by showing a very honest reflection of a man suddenly being placed within a new physical state. This as he is not simply this "new man" rather he shows the "old man" now sort of forced within this new body, and basically terrified by the image of this change directly before him.

Hudson excels in these early scenes by doing something that is entirely the opposite of what he became known for, which is instead of comfort and confidence with have discomfort and lack of confidence. This as he even goes about speaking to someone Hudson matches Randolph's manner initially as the man where he retiring and distant to the men he speaking to. His expression still baring the idea of a man really simply lost in his existence, which the re-birthing organization wishes to provide to him. Although it apparently might've not helped with the film's financial success, I will say it is a masterstroke of casting in bringing Rock Hudson. This in part in terms of being in part sort of the idealized "Reborn" version of the man, but it also makes it all the more striking to see this typically more Adonis like figure to seem so ill at ease within himself. Hudson portrays Arthur as a man still in that state of anxiety, and now perhaps even more unable to simply be comfortable in his own skin, given that skin barely resembles himself anymore. Even as he gets his life set up for him as a bohemian style artist, Hudson portrays the struggle in his manner which is just having a hard time being himself. Hudson though finds just the right degree of sort comfort in his new self and his new manner. He doesn't break from his shell until Arthur comes across a woman Nora (Salome Marcus). This as he finally sees a connection, however I love that Hudson doesn't fall upon his typical romantic comedy charm. He rather plays it in a sincere sense of discovery and seemingly a potential  connection finally as he seems to find it through their former mutual disconnection in their personal lives.

This relationship though burgeons quickly past that more intimate state as she basically brings him to a pagan styled orgy. Hudson's terrific though in portraying a natural elderly distaste for the even initial until he is literally thrown into it. In the moment though Hudson is fantastic in showing Arthur just giving into a jubilation purely based on the basic lust filled moment. This doesn't last long as we see Arthur in the throws based on that lust and his material possessions the company has provided to him. This coming to head at a party where Arthur has too much to drink and begins to think about his double life. Hudson, who apparently was actually drunk in the scene, is brilliant in wholly carrying it even within that drunkenness. This as he finds this state of sort of a perfect kind of mental breakdown in the moment. This in that jubilation is there but he offers it as this hyper intensity in his expressions as a man who cannot really accept it. This as he speaks with the sense of a mess of emotions of a man still attached to his past while also seemingly sensing the holes in the future that has been crafted for him. This of course is just it as after the night Arthur begins to see the nefarious nature of the company that is watching over him and the hollowness of it as even Nora was simply a paid employee there to provide for his needs. Hudson's reaction in learning this is heartbreaking in the simplicity of it. This in just finding the quiet anxiety once again in the man, though now a little bit different. This in that Hudson begins to play the part with not more confidence, but a better sense of  himself. This not in portraying Arthur becoming this new man, but rather finally a man who is able to reflect upon himself.

This we see as Arthur visits his "widowed" wife to essentially ask her about himself. Hudson is again exceptional by so quietly playing the scene of the man just listening to his wife. This in his eyes sensing both the real affection again that matches Randolph, though now more pointed even if purposefully muted. There is more though as she speaks Hudson finally creates a sense of connection in hearing the words with understanding rather than anxiety. Arthur is sent back to the organization, with the claimed proposition of getting another chance at rebirth. In this time Arthur finally finds his friend Charlie (Murray Hamilton), who too his waiting for "Seconds". Hudson is great though in this scene in the earnest wisdom he brings as he speaks Arthur's final truth of seeing his mistakes both of the past and the present. There's a real poignancy as Hudson delivery grants the sadness of the man seeing the failure but also in that some hope in a man finally seeing what caused his past failures. This earning the moments where Arthur refuses to sponsor more people to the organization as Charlie had done for him. This unfortunately though leading to all the swifter jump for Arthur being set for his chance at "seconds", sadly any personal gains are lost as that means he will be used as a corpse to orchestrate a future "rebirth". This does though lead to an outstanding scene for Hudson, that not only is incredible in terms of his own work, but quite daring for the time. This as Hudson portrays Arthur's realization that he's about to be killed from slow dread to manic intensity of a man writhing in pain and terror. Hudson brings such a visceral edge to the scene as you feel every moment of the man lashing out yet failing to escape his horrible fate. Hudson is wholly convincing in the scene making the ending of the film absolutely unforgettable. He doesn't make it pretty in the least, rather is wholly convincing in showing a man doing anything he can to stave off death in a futile effort. Now John Randolph gives a terrific performance that establishes this man's journey, and Hudson going against his expected type, doesn't waste it in giving an incredible show of range and ability, that frankly I didn't know he had in him. This in creating such a powerful and heartbreaking portrait of a man discovering how he lost purpose and discovery a way though tragically too late.

(For Randolph, also in a very strange grey area when it comes to category placement.)

(For Hudson)

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1966: Will Geer & Murray Hamilton in Seconds

Will Geer and Murray Hamilton did not receive Oscar nominations for portraying the Old Man and Charlie Evans respectively in Seconds.

I will first say spoilers, and recommend one just sees seconds which is a terrific underrated film. Another film that some how was derided upon release and so many times one can only wonder, what were the critics at the time thinking? One of the great aspects of the film is the ensemble cast filled with memorable character actors. One of the most memorable being Will Geer who typically played kindly down home types, and that appears to be what he might be playing here when the first appears in the film. This as he suddenly appears as our protagonist is going through the procedure to be "reborn" by a mysterious company, that takes aging men and gives them a new body and a new lease on life, supposedly. Geer's initial appearance is talking through the man about his current life. Geer is brilliant in this scene this as he presents himself just as a kindly old man. Upon initial view one might be foolish enough to take him as that. This as Geer speaks with a sweet sprightly way, an endearing smile, and eyes filled with interest for this man he speaks to...when the man is looking at him. You would be foolish enough to believe as Geer tells the man his life currently is basically meaningless, but he delivers it with the most sunny of dispositions. Geer does two things with this in one he makes it entirely convincing that the man would accept being "reborn" and losing his entire life for it, but also the more you pay attention the more quietly unnerving he is. This as he speaks with that wisdom of a country doctor, but basically he is pushing a pessimistic if not nihilistic view regarding the man's existence. I love though in that Geer wields that kindly presence as the Old man's tool to push the man to take his service as though it's a gift, when it may be anything but. This reflected though in the less the man looks at him, the more nefarious the old man's smiles seem, and the less any real warmth one may sense in him.

Murray Hamilton is a character actor I think we should all just take a second to admire a bit. This as you see him pop up in any classic film the man delivers. Whether that be his gambler in The Hustler, Death in his Twilight Zone episode, or his most remembered role as the morally questionable mayor in Jaws, among others. Hamilton is a proper character actor in that he delivers every time to the point one wonders what he could do with a more substantial role. Well this isn't that, his screentime is limited, but it does allow him to explore a bit more of his range. Now that screentime is limited to the point that for his early appearances are in voice only, as he repeatedly calls our protagonist trying to get him to take up the opportunity of being reborn. Hamilton's voice work is great however as he speaks with in part this sort of lurid salesman enthusiasm in part as he tries to convince the man. There is more though just in his voice, an underlying desperation about it as though he is harried to get him to accept the offer. What the desperation from is of course unsaid at first, but Hamilton's voice speaks a man within some constraint. This is only all the more evident later on when he tries to call to encourage the man a bit more, again Hamilton speaks in an evasive yet anxiety filled way. Hamilton speaking as trying to sell the man the idea while also obviously being under an inordinate amount of stress in the "sale". We actually see Hamilton, unknowing that he is the character of Charlie Evans who calls the man over the phone claiming to be his old friend, relatively early on in the film. This as the man stumbles into a room, in the offices of the rebirth company, where many men just seem to be sitting around. This including Hamilton who looks upon his old friend suggesting that he knows this man, though subtly as not to give himself away in those small glances of his.

Now the man's life being reborn isn't particularly successful which takes him back to the company, awaiting a "second" chance at rebirth. In this first he awaits this meeting in that room we earlier saw Charlie, and here we have what is Hamilton's highlighted scene of the film. It's Hamilton's one big scene, and to be sure he does not waste. This right from even the way he identifies his old friend in the moment as his expression is just brimming with this excitement as though he hasn't seen a familiar or friendly face in some time, or at least as familiar as it can get it in his strange circumstances. Hamilton instantly grants the sense of familiarity, and I love everything about his manner that grants the sense of an attempt to really create a sudden camaraderie with his old friend. Hamilton offers even this small moment a lot of depth, making more to Charlie than just being simply there. Hamilton though continues in this creating Charlie as entirely his own man with his own experience. This when asked how long he's been waiting for a second chance at being reborn, with his strained smile against his delivery of "awhile" paints a painful picture of a man seemingly in a hopeless endeavor. Hamilton is most moving though by presenting this sort innate optimism in his portrayal of Charlie, right to explaining why he sponsored his friend for this treatment. This explaining it with scattered unease how he hoped his friend might have had a better chance. When the man explains the waste, Hamilton's reaction says so much as his whole face is tight as though the man is trying to fix himself on some hopeful thought as though he's fighting of a painful depression the whole time. When suddenly Charlie is chosen for his "second chance" Hamilton is absolutely heartbreaking in the sheer jubilation he portrays. This not just happiness, but rather on the edge of a breakdown over the relief as though he has been waiting for it for an eternity. The combination of the bittersweet quality of Hamilton's work creating his own remarkable portrait of man hopelessly awaiting what he believes will be his personal redemption. It is brief work, but it is brilliant work, as Hamilton doesn't waste a second of his onscreen or even off-screen time to not only make the needed impact on the story, but also realize Charlie's story as well. Speaking of not wasting a second of screentime though we have the return of Geer as the Old Man at the end of the film. Initially Geer comes in again with that seeming sincerity as he states his hope the man could've made a go of his rebirth. When he continues to speak though Geer loses sort of the false sentiment and just starts speaking about the way his organization has been going. Geer is downright terrifying as he speaks of profit sharing as it relates to basically of disposing of men. Geer having such an ease in every word of man so comfortable with his truly horrible endeavor. This right as he basically is sentencing a man to death, and Geer inflicts this cold darkness as he speaks to moving his dream forward. I love what basically his final moment, where he reassures the man, just as he's about to be hauled off to be killed, with one more false smile that Geer brilliantly deflects as he loses it to just a cold dismissive glance as he orders his men to carry the man off to his death. Geer's performance crafting a man horrifying and unusual devil. This as a man who with so much ease tempts a man and with that same ease condemns. Both of these performances is fantastic, that take very limited roles in terms of their screentime, and making a lasting impression that makes Seconds all the more memorable of an experience.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1966: Paul Meurisse in Le Deuxième Souffle

Paul Meurisse did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Commissaire Blot in Le Deuxième Souffle.

Le Deuxième Souffle follows an escaped gangster Gu (Lino Ventura) through "one last job" which naturally has complications. It's a very good film, though it is a little too gradually paced for its own good as it occasionally loses its momentum when the editing could easily pick up its pace.

Paul Meurisse plays some seemingly required  element for many a crime story, which is the cop trying to catch the crook. Early on the film you might be mistaken this might be a Heat, style situation where we follow both the cop and the crook at an even keel. This might in part come from the grand impression Paul Meurisse makes as the detective Blot in his first scene. This as he comes in to investigate a hit on a gangster in a crime intertwined restaurant owned by the escaped Gu's lover Manouche (Christine Fabrega). Meurisse has to be said is absolutely brilliant in this scene. This as Blot investigates the crime scene by basically noting all the logical inconsistencies of the likely explanations of everyone at the restaurant to deny anything happened in a typical gangster sort of way. Meurisse is marvelous in his sarcastic delivery yet incisive manner as he goes about each piece of the crime scene to artfully dissect it while mocking the witnesses by already noting will be their excuses for each element. Meurisse is just marvelous in this scene as he is wholly engaging and absolutely entertaining in this sequence. This in as he both shows the cunning of Blot as he breaks down each element, but is also just extremely captivating while doing it. Meurisse in the single scene setting up a fantastic adversary for the crooks we will be following otherwise, this just through that comic yet also exact manner he delivers in this first scene of his.

Meurisse distinguishes effectively this sort of purposeful grandstanding though against the detective who obviously does care about the job he is doing. This as we later see him attempt to interrogate Manouche alone, who is in danger within the life. Meurisse is terrific by projecting a different more intense tone. He still grants an underlying levity about the man, but his eyes reinforce the gravity he is trying to convey to her in an attempt to actually get her to speak. Meurisse excels in creating the sense of Blot's methods as he attempts to make any headway within the criminal world. In one part where he attempts to derive what he wants from another criminal, Meurisse is effective by once against maneuvering the scene a little differently. This still with a slight callous manner suggesting Blot's indifference to the man he is interrogating as a person, however his accentuation is upon the serious nature of the situation in which he speaks. Meurisse creating the sense of Blot's subtle manipulation of the gangster in an attempt to try to get what he wants as this sort of artful dance based on the motivations of whoever he is speaking to. An essential moment in this is when he is doing the same with Manouche's bodyguard/valet, and Meurisse delivers again a more jovial quality in speaking to the man as though he is a friend. This against the moment the man walks away and the spirit drifts from his face showing again the methods of Blot. I honestly wish there had been more of Blot, in part Meurisse excels in being both entertaining while also creating the sense of the ways of his detective, but also in terms of potentially creating more of a dynamic. Instead the Blot scenes are closer to afterthoughts, or would be if Meurisse were less engaging in the part. This I think would've most served though an element later in the film where we get a contrast between Blot and another Commissaire who engages in torture. Meurisse in his moments projecting a smooth operator who succeeds through careful manipulations against the other man who just does it by force. Nonetheless Meurisse makes the most out of this idea in the final scenes of the film where he very quietly stands against them. Meurisse though is great in the scene of trying to get a reporter to take evidence that reveals the torture, this beginning with a subtle clever push exemplified in his expression that slowly morphs to exasperation as he basically has to spell out how to get the evidence to them. Although I do think it is a little unfortunate that the film largely makes Blot mostly there to serve an overly specific function after his first scene, Meurisse excels even within those limitations. This in creating a character who leaves an impression, even if his first scene is his high point, that would be worthy to act as a proper lead in a film that followed Commissaire Blot.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1966

And the Nominees Were Not:

John Randolph in Seconds

Will Geer in Seconds

Murray Hamilton in Seconds

Paul Meurisse in Le Deuxième Souffle

Donald Pleasence in Fantastic Voyage

Alternate Best Actor 1966: Results

5. Eddie Axberg in Here Is Your Life - Axberg gives a largely reactionary turn, however it works in creating the right naturalism within his character for his film.

Best Scene: Date.

4. Anatoly Solonitsyn in Andrei Rublev - Although very low key Solonitsyn's often observant turn effectively still realizes his character's quietly striking arc throughout his film.

Best Scene: After the bell rings. 

3. David Warner in Morgan - A Suitable Case for Treatment - Warner effectively gives a wild comic yet intense turn, even if his film doesn't use him all that well.

Best Scene: Trying to assassinate someone.

2. Donald Pleasence in Cul-De-Sac - Pleasence brilliantly captures the suffocating neurosis of his character and its degradation throughout the story.

Best Scene: Final breakdown.

1. Per Oscarsson in Hunger - Oscarsson performance naturally captures the tragic state of his character while doing so with a remarkable levity.

Best Scene: Hunger.

Updated Overall

Next: 1966 Supporting

Alternate Best Actor 1966: David Warner in Morgan - A Suitable Case For Treatment

David Warner did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a BAFTA, for portraying the Morgan Delt in Morgan - A Suitable Case For Treatment.

Morgan - A Suitable Case for treatment fits within the English comedies of the time which typically were particularly chaotic, often to a fault, satires. Here we have a less than okay one about a failed artist dealing with his wife (Vanessa Redgrave)'s affair, sorta

David Warner takes on his first leading role here as the titular character. This being a different performance for him in many ways, as Warner is typically best known for his rather controlled individuals, even when playing evil men, they are more often of the calm and collected sort. David Warner though plays a man who is a suitable case for treatment after all, so it is fair to say that mentally he isn't all there. Warner's performance is pure madness here, that isn't helped by Morgan's situation where his wife is sleeping with his former best friend. What doesn't help matters though is she seems as bonkers as he is, just a little more low key about it, but in turn entirely encourages the madness of Morgan as he attempts to win her back. This is not some traditional endeavor though because Morgan isn't a normal man. Warner's performance is remarkable just in the overall setup of this as he has a ferocity in his energy, as he brings his typical intensity here but externalizes it more. This as he succeeds in creating a less controlled individual where there is a manic quality in his manner, particularly that of the physical. At the same time though he does have that Warner sort of power within his performance that does create the best moments in the film. This being in the manner in which he tries to kill his former best friend, and in these moments Warner is hilarious. This with what is best described as casual intensity Warner brings as he threatens the man while also maintaining a certain courtesy about it.

There are some enjoyable bits just through Warner's off-beat delivering that combines his typical presence though in a more unwieldy sense. Warner though also does offer a touch of depth within his moments with Redgrave. This as much as he still makes Morgan a raving lunatic who seems both pent up with lust and range, there is a minor sense within his expressions a more earnest need or concern for his wife.  This though is randomly interspersed with the eccentricities of the character, that frankly feels a bit over written and under written in the same measure. This as we get that he has some strange ideas of communism, not as a believer of the views but just that he holds himself attached to the figures therein. This really doesn't add up to much other than acting as a fodder for in which Morgan can rave about. Enjoyable ravings in Warner's performance, but not much more than that. We also have his animal obsession than naturally, or maybe not so naturally, eventually leads Morgan to wear a gorilla suit while trying to foil his wife's remarriage. Again Warner is more than up to the task in terms of granting the idea something in his own performance. His physical manner, which often takes upon a simian like  manner, is well drawn, and again creates the madness of Morgan in at least an entertaining way through his own work. Here is the problem with this film, which I guess I probably had a bit less patience for after watching a similarly styled Lord Love a Duck, as it like that film it introduces general ideas but really lets itself be just a chaotic mess with thinking that the mere introduction of an idea is enough. It isn't enough this as the film gets repetitive quickly because it doesn't grow or examine its ideas as bits, and the bits themselves end up losing their oomph after awhile because they don't change. We really don't get to explore Morgan beyond a comic idea, those eccentricities really don't have any real depth to them, and seem almost created as an illusion of depth. This as the film seems to suggest one can satirizes a communist radical by merely having the words, but it doesn't do anything with it of note. This leaves the talented David Warner to effectively create the setup for the character, and even thrive enough within the repetitious nature of the film. It sadly though loses its momentum by never reinventing itself and only getting more indulgent as the film proceeds. I wish the film really let Warner do anything with the part, but it is content in thinking a generalized off-beat weirdness will carry itself. This leaving a film that isn't funny enough to be so surface thin in its satire. Warner is good in showing a different side of his talent as a performer. Although even this is troubled as the film doesn't even filter his performance properly, as Redgrave is in a way underused, and the film fails to create a proper straight man dynamic against Warner. He's just kind of there to try to make scenes work, notable then that he doesn't entirely fail. I just wish the film had either given him better comic setups throughout or actually progressed its story in some insightful way.

Alternate Best Actor 1966: Per Oscarsson in Hunger

Per Oscarsson did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning Cannes and NSFC, for portraying Pontus in Hunger

Hunger depicts a penniless writer wandering the streets of a city.

The nature of the story from the cursory glance suggests that Per Oscarsson's work could be one of that of quiet soul bearing, of a poor man. Well that's not at all the case, in fact if there was a performance I'd compare this to most swiftly would be Charlie Chaplin as the tramp. This is not just as both characters often wander streets in their existence, but rather the entirety of Oscarsson's work carries with it a similar energy. Now this isn't a silent film, nor is this a comedy, Oscarsson's performance though is one where he carries himself in a unique manner that crafts that idea of his Pontus, more than the average homeless man. This is rather Oscarsson's work crafts him as an eccentric within this situation, and in doing so makes this likely a far more captivating experience. This is strongly within Oscarsson's physicality within the role, which is simply wonderful. The way he even walks is with this near directionless. This as though even when he's walking in a straight line, it isn't quite assured fitting for a man who in many ways is aimless, or at least looking for the right path. This is brilliantly built within though his overall demeanor that attempts this type of erudite, as though he is a philosopher within this situation of his. Oscarsson keeping this not quite proper, yet very specifically measured manner. This with his frequent courteous removal of his hat that he uses as essentially a running gag through the frequency, and often questionable use. Oscarsson though presenting within that, even as it is enjoyable, also shows Pontus as in a sort of, well note quite denial, though in part an avoidance of his situation.

Oscarsson's performance I think is essential within the success of the film as without it I think it would be inescapable dourness, however Oscarsson portraying Pontus's methods of trying to exist in the state, adds the right degree of levity, while also informing the audience of his character. This as Oscarsson more than anything, in that energy within his work, presents the fortitude or at the very least the persistence of the man. This as he saunters around the street Oscarsson grants technically the aimlessness of the man at times, but also his desire to try to work things out. This with frequent stops at a pawn shop to try to make a minor bit of money for survival while also attempting to make it as a writer, or perhaps anything else. Oscarsson's movement really does two things. One is he is engaging if not entirely entertaining to watch within these movements. He though does this in a way that succeeds in the second part, which is successfully portray the state of the man as seemingly a fruitless endeavor. Another aspect with this duality is within the way Oscarsson speaks within his performance. Oscarsson is again fantastic in the off-beat yet still genuine way in which he realizes his manner. We are granted the sense of a writer's eccentricity in his moments of pondering to himself, where again he is actively enjoyable in the way he speaks these rambling, while also in these ramblings shows a mind moving towards shambles. Oscarsson making Pontus someone who is enjoyable to be with, while also conveying with it the honest reality of his situation.

Oscarsson carefully plays the moments interacting with others though, again with a sort spry manner in portraying a man as though he is acting as though he is in an entirely fine within his situation. He brings though, even within the kindness, as the film goes on a more hurried delivering, even still with a sense of optimism that crafts the sort of decay of his state. We see this as well in, what again feels a bit Tramp like, is when Pontus romances a wealthier woman in the city, although not all may be as it seems in terms of reality. Oscarsson delivers a charm within his awkwardness. This being in his sly smile, and again a demeanor that is unorthodox in a most engaging way. Again though Oscarsson creates the sense of the presentation against also the struggle the man is going through. There are changes in his expression that alludes to other thoughts as related to his difficulty even as he he speaks the sweet nothings of a proper poet. He never loses the sense of his state, even when he is out of it seemingly within the relationship, even if for a moment. I love that Oscarsson doesn't show this to be a facade as much as coping mechanism. This in portraying that his eagerness isn't false even if technically not entirely true due to the man's struggle.

Even when that potential romantic affair loses itself, due to the limits of the mind, Oscarsson delivers in the moment of a certain rejection the man dealing with it in his particular way, though with a greater sense of his vulnerability. Oscarsson finds honesty within the eccentricity, and manages to grant that levity, while also wholly revealing the soul of the situation. I think what are essential moments within this though are in the titular word of the film. This in Hunger, hunger after all is not something one can really place over on a facade, it is a real, and painful experience. Oscarsson in the moments of his character's struggle, powerfully, and bluntly shows this an aspect in which he cannot talk himself out of the pain essentially. This in a moment where he throws up from eating bad meat, Oscarsson is heartbreaking the moment of just blunt desperation that he portrays in the moment of strict suffering. His words only painted by pain of dealing with yet another hardship. We see the same when he is enjoying a meal again, this in the rush to indulge in the food, we are granted an honesty of his situation. Oscarsson showing in the moments of hunger, that really there's nothing man can do other than accept his situation in the moment. His near final moment of raging at the world, albeit briefly, is so well performed as again the man losing himself into the desperation in this mania, however again Oscarsson presents within a man who is trying so hard to keep it together. This is a brilliant performance by Per Oscarsson. This is as he carries the film in terms of its momentum, but also in crafting such genuine portrait of the man's state. This state of existing both in the present, and while also being lost in his own mind.

Alternate Best Actor 1966: Donald Pleasence in Cul-de-Sac

Donald Pleasence did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying George in Cul-de-Sac.

Cul-de-sac is a somewhat intriguing riff on the somewhat tried plot of a criminal creating a hostage situation by seeking refuge with some normal people, the normal people here not being all that normal.

After all the man, whom criminal Dickey (Lionel Strander), chooses to hide out at is played by Donald Pleasence. That already suggests this isn't exactly going to be a Desperate Hours situation of an average family man dealing with a violent criminal. We instead have Pleasence, known for the more we'll say extreme individuals, who we first meet as he is frolicking in his bedroom with his young wife Teresa (Françoise Dorléac). Pleasence is brilliantly mad in this sequence as he gets dressed up as a woman with makeup as well as they interact. This as Pleasence captures a rather unique tone within the scene that is a combination of something that while being technically intense towards the idea the character's lust, yet also spells doubt within his sort state within this relationship. This as Pleasence plays both active and passive within the interactions. This as his eyes capture the mania of going along with the act, and at the same time that certain mania alludes to the way he also has a neurotic quality combined within that. Pleasence showing a man in a state of relationship that obviously has some sort of intimacy there, but it is also a detachment all the same within the near insanity of the interaction. This marital "bliss" is short lived within the film though as the two's dalliance is broken up by Strander's Dickey who demands to use their house to hideout with the two being held as basically assumed gun point.

Pleasence's performance then in many ways here is the factor within the film that differentiates itself from most stories of the ilk. This as there is nothing about George that is a man in this situation traditionally as the secret hero or event he obvious coward. Pleasence is terrific in portraying basically this nervous breakdown the man is having in presence over the criminal, although his breakdown isn't seemingly in wholly relation to the criminal. Donald Pleasence granting his performance this near constant unease in the physicality of his work. This as even just in the way Pleasence breaths has a hurried quality, his head constantly taut, and his movements with a messy quality within them. Pleasence granting the sense of George on the verge of this breakdown and his performance portraying a man seemingly filled with worry, far beyond dealing with a violent criminal. In his interactions with the violent criminal Pleasence's portrayal of the so called fear of it is with a broken intensity of a man tip toeing on the edge of some cliff. Pleasence speaking with this near mess of words together his his deliveries this particularly when speaking of his relationship with his wife.  Although he doesn't quite state it directly, Pleasence speaks each word regarding her with this straining anxiety. Pleasence's portrayal is that of a worn mind that seems unable to comprehend his current situation almost given how caught up he is within his own mind.

The only switch though is when guests briefly come over to the house, where they must act as though nothing is out of the ordinary. This though technically is where Pleasence heavily changes his performance towards creating the idea of likely how George usually presents himself to most people. Pleasence's changes though are in the presentation of this George. This as he changes his physical performance to careful movements that are so careful they're a touch stilted. He speaks in ways with a quieter quality, though incisive though as he grants even in this quiet delivery that intensity if more carefully wound. Pleasence showing a man who even here is just barely keeping together within the normal society.  After the guests leave it essentially only leave a final violent confrontation with George to take action against Dickey. It is a remarkable portrayal of a complete mental breakdown in Pleasence's performance. This in the very act of the killing by George is with a demented neurosis. This as he barely even looks upon his target and he presents this act as a moment of sheer insanity. This though is not the end of it as Pleasence's whole performance reveals the mess of George's mind that remains after it all. His work showing the way the neurosis that was ever present fully take over as his he speaks as a man with a most limited grasp on reality. His whole manner becoming detached from all things except the randomness of the ramblings that Pleasence grants the right sense to, the sense being that George has entirely lost his mind in the moment. Although in the end I wish overall the film had maybe a bit more complexity within the scenario itself, there is still much to be found within Pleasence's portrait of man on an edge being pushed off.

Alternate Best Actor 1966: Eddie Axberg in Here is Your Life

Eddie Axberg did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Olof Persson in Here is Your Life.

Here is Your Life follows the life of a young man coming of age. Although perhaps longer than it needs to be, it once again features Jan Troell's great skill at making the seemingly mundane captivating, and at the very least is an impressive theatrically released feature film debut.

Eddie Axberg, who eventually played one of Troell's emigrants, here plays the lead of this story of a young man in Sweden. This as a working class young man trying to make his way on his own after having left his home. Axberg's character of Olof isn't one of extreme complexity, in the sense that the emphasis is on Olof being in many ways this average surrogate. He's not some young man who has an exceptional purpose or intent, for much of the film he's just trying to make his one through one job, one boss and one different event after another. Axberg's performance is one that very much exists within a natural state, and such a thing while not showy by any means shouldn't be entirely overlooked either. What Axberg does though is find the purpose within being just a naturally unassuming young man. This as there is definitely a danger to be just a purely a blank slate, but Axberg is a talented enough performer to do a little more. This is as his state is one that is strictly convincing. He convinces you of the existence of the young man and finds the right degree of nuance, even while maintaining the general sense of simplicity within the character's life. This in finding the right moments to really reflect what is going on around him.

This can be relatively straight forward such as just acting in a brief rage when being harassed by some men, or something subtle such as the brightness of his expression when he's in a moment of, what he believes to be, romance. Axberg's work very much accentuates the situation effectively. This bringing the sense of frustration in a moment of hardship, a bit of charm in moment, or just sort of the sense of enjoyment of life when frolicking in the countryside. This is a minor aspect of potential revolutionary thoughts in Olof. This is more attuned to those around him than Olof himself. Axberg plays these moments well in portraying in his eyes the sense of interest in the words of revolutionary thought, however even in this he is the one who reacts more than acts or speaks these thoughts. This is all intended within the film that works in just basically showing this coming of age, in a seemingly simplistic, yet thanks to Troell's touches, effective portrayal of this young man's life. There isn't some great upheaval just life, and Axberg's performance is a reflection of this. His work isn't really able to go beyond a certain point, however within the limits of Olof as just a normal guy, living a mostly normal life, he's good. He brings life to Olof, and even as just a typical quiet person, he importantly still grants the right sense of individuality, and understanding of his experience.

Alternate Best Actor 1966: Paul Newman in Harper

Paul Newman did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Lew Harper in Harper.

Harper is a decent enough if largely forgettable detective mystery.

Paul Newman plays the role of the largely detached detective, honestly most detective stories are helped by a larger degree of personal connection. This is not that case as it is largely a procedural of uncovering one part of a conspiracy after another. Newman plays our hero of Lew Harper, who we see as a slightly hapless sort essentially from an opening scene where he reuses old coffee ground in his disheveled office. Newman really making the most out of that scene just in his less than enthused reaction to the coffee he's made somewhat questionably. After this point is essentially Newman doing his best approach to the detective, who is largely driven to solve the mystery though does do it in a fairly unique way. Newman brings of course a certain definite charm here as is usually the case for him, though he doesn't overly emphasize it here actually. He actually plays Harper with a generally sort of wry and often sardonic manner. This with certain shrugs at certain news and eye glances of disbelief when hearing about the various ins and outs of all those he encounters. Newman portraying all of these interactions as though he really doesn't take any of them that seriously in the sense that as the detective he must second guess every one. Newman creating sort of the false sense of incompetence as though Harper doesn't care at all, though in his eyes there he emphasizes the method within that he does make his moves. Newman playing well though into sort of the joking way that successfully suggests Harper's way of both disarming each person while also prying in his own way.

The procedure in this mystery doesn't have too much of real personal stakes, there is a slight friendship angle with one of the suspects but even that doesn't amount to much. Outside of the main story though we do get moments of Harper dealing with the fact that his wife (Janet Leigh) is divorcing him. These are small moments however effectively played as the bit of entirely earnest work in Newman's portrayal when other ask abut it. His quiet frustrations are well played as one thing Harper isn't going to joke about to others about. Although this is in contrast to his scene of trying to win his wife back by calling her with a obviously fake crank call. Newman's delightful in this scene in bringing the right flirtations playfulness in the moment and all the moments of speaking to Leigh. Newman shows in these moments both how he probably won her over but also how he lost her as he still doesn't quite take it seriously enough. These are good moments but only really brief moments outside of the main narrative. The main narrative that takes Newman through the various expected detective tropes, false leads, incompetent law enforcers, double crosses, and of course suspects denying their true motivations. Newman maneuvers these scenes effectively with the sardonic charm here. It doesn't add up to too much mainly as Harper has limited connection really to the case. Even in his one major personal moment at the end of the film, Newman's delivering still is a sardonic brush off, it works in his character, but just shows the limitation here. The case really though is simply never *that* compelling. Newman though makes it more compelling than it would be otherwise through his reliable performance. Newman though does best when he has more material to really sink his teeth in. When he's coasting he can be good, which he is here, but just good. This stands as a more than decent straight forward detective performance, and stands as a more than decent Newman turn, though it isn't too remarkable in either category.