Alternate Best Actor 1970: Alec Guinness in Cromwell

Alec Guinness did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying King Charles I in Cromwell. 

Cromwell is more than decent realization, of a great story, about the rebellion of Oliver Cromwell in England. 

Alec Guinness plays the secondary lead of the King of England Charles, who comes to clash with Richard Harris, a fitting firebrand, as Oliver Cromwell, featured here largely as a righteous freedom fighter. Guinness being an ideal actor for a quiet King, this as his presence is one that is striking even when silent as is the case here. Guinness's performance though is remarkable in creating Charles a complex figure within a story that could've potentially pressed him a simpler villain or even just a fool. Guinness's portrayal early on grants more than anything this weight of conflicted responsibilities. This as we see him speak towards those his Catholic wife views lowly, Guinness speaks with a tempering manner. An attempt to create a gracious quality of the man who wishes moderation. Guinness's voice though remarkably contrasting his eyes that speak towards the responsibility of a more personal level. This in the sort of recognition within his eyes a frustration with his wife, but also a resignation towards her wishes. Guinness does so much more than simply sit there, he creates a conflict within the man that is almost entirely unspoken yet wholly realized within his performance. Guinness showing Charles to not necessarily being a bad by nature but rather a leader compromised by his position. 

Charles takes his wife's choices towards trying to arrest Cromwell and his acolytes. A scene that again is such striking work just by looking purely upon Guinness's performance. This as he speaks with just a calm authority of the arrests to be made, notable most against Harris's fierce passionate performance. Guinness showing the state of the man sticking towards a certain script as he declares the arrests, but again his facial expressions say so much. This in the glints of unease as he sees Cromwell's rejection of the events, and again finding a greater complication within Charles than perhaps the overall film even means to present. Guinness finds nuance within the depiction creating even in the battle scenes a man of a certain inadequacy. This as Guinness presenting Charles as being almost lost within the whole thing, with a certain sense of a gentleman's indifference towards the affair though it be more a game than an actual battle. After he begins to lose, we have a moment of him trying to figure out how to continue the battle. This as Guinness brings such  sense of defeat as he speaks every attempted strategy. A sadness within the frustration of a man unaware of this kind of anxiety. A weakness of course is found in his work, but there is such a humanity he brings in this pathetic quality. This even in the way he so sadly holds his flag as he attempts, and fails to argue with his allies regarding his intentions to use whatever means necessary to win. Guinness wonderfully emphasizes the man, within the failure making Charles far more interesting than he would be otherwise. 

Guinness finds a complexity within the weakness of the poor leader, and even a certain sympathy. Take the scene where he is almost at a loss, where one of his commanders has abandoned his defeated army. Guinness leading a weak bluster against the man attempting to maintain the claim as the strong King. After the man leaves though, any sense of confidence drifts from his face. This with a somber depression as his eyes show a man whose whole world is falling apart before his eyes. His moments of moving his men's pieces from the map is a simple one, but powerful within Guinness's portrayal of it with such a sincere sense of loss. Even when Charles is seeing off his wife and son, as Cromwell's army is closing in, it is not that of the villain getting his righteous defeat. This rather Guinness expresses a true heartbreak both in the personal moment of saying goodbye to his wife and son, but also in the sense of failure towards leading Great Britain. After his fall, where he remains a captive of sorts. We see the split of the man well realized on both ends by Guinness. This being the sheer warmth he brings in playing with family and a loving man in that. This against a meeting with Cromwell, who offers Charles a way out that Charles does not accept, which Guinness presents with a quiet stubbornness, a learned stubbornness from years of following an accepted path. This shown even when denounced as a tyrant. 

 

Guinness presents a blithe indifference and questions the authority of the court. Guinness speaking with a privilege, mental privilege, of a man convinced by his very existence as a King that he must be beyond a normal judgement. The difference between the personal and the public though, Guinness finds a man who perhaps would've good as just a man, but as king, raised to be a king, is a terrible one. When he sentenced to be executed, Guinness's performance is essential and incredible in realizing Charles. This as it is not just a sense of fear, but a sheer emotional distress. This as Guinness's expression is of a man who cannot believe it simply could happen by way of his existence up until this point. Again Guinness so notably finding this moments to detail Charles more deeply. Guinness in doing this not only making Charles more interesting as a character, but also making his journey far more emotional than it would be. This in his final meeting with his family, Guinness is genuinely and powerfully heartbreaking. This as his face shows so sincerely the distress within the man awaiting his fate, while still speaking with a king's grace as he gives his son orders. Guinness showing though a loving family man in the moment, as his voice cracks as a man who genuinely loves his family. Guinness managing to make a moving portrait of the man, even while still realizing Charles as a bad leader. I love what Guinness does here as he offers such detail towards Charles as a man and as a King, I only wish the rest of the film brought the same level of attention to the more intimate elements of this potent tale. 

Alternate Best Actor 1970: Richard Harris in The Molly Maguires

Richard Harris did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Detective James McPharlan/James McKenna in The Molly Maguires. 

The Molly Maguires is a good though not great film (and the subject matter/scenario implies that possibility) about a detective infiltrating a criminal gang of discontented Irish miners in Pennsylvania.

 

I'll be honest going into this film the first time I honestly expected a reversal of the roles. This being with Sean Connery as the infiltrating policeman and Richard Harris as the Irish radical. That's not the case though an interesting reversal of expectations against the actors' more typical presences. Harris though gets an alternative towards the potentially more wild role as the quiet detective carefully infiltrating the organization by first coming to town like any old immigrant. This is where we perhaps get a little more expected Harris with the first thing he does is getting into a fight. Harris is always game to that kind of intensity though that isn't the truth of the character, and even this instance is portrayed by him as very much minor within the nature of his James. Where we get more of the man actually is where we follow him immediately after that where he meets with his police contact. This is where we see Harris's overarching approach in this role which is a very quiet and internalized performance from him. This as we initially see him speaking towards his handler, that which he puts no great joy in remarking on the duty. Initially rather Harris just carries himself with a sort of professional distance within the situation. Speaking towards it without pleasure, but without an exact conflict. Harris rather initially depicts the professional within James as he goes about his task. 

We follow then James as he goes about his infiltration of the group by essentially making himself seem like the most normal of men in the situations. Harris is good in playing the part of James playing the part, not as this major facade but rather the man James would be if he weren't a detective. The tell really being almost entirely within Harris's eyes that carry with them an incisiveness in certain moments as he attempts to decipher where he can find his path into the Molly Maguires led by Connery's "Black Jack" Kehoe. Otherwise we see James living his life as a miner and there Harris excels within his work as the quiet leading man. This in just presenting a charm, though tempered for Harris, in his moments with a local religious woman Mary (Samantha Eggar). This in creating an earnest kind of chemistry between them. This where we perhaps see the real James in these effectively tender moments in which the two share their seemingly modest dreams outside of the dismal living. In the community Harris doesn't project James being a leader, but rather seemingly just a good man looking for a path. This after one test after another by Cohoe's men, these tests that James beats again through a modest consistency. Harris again portraying well just the calm demeanor of the man who is doing his job well by mostly not making a great deal of noise and just gradually making his way into the organization of the Molly Maguires. 

Within this though we see as the further James infiltrates the further there is a sense of empathy for the plight of the men. Harris is terrific in presenting this certain shame that grows in his performance and a certain underlying passion when he states a certain understanding of the men's discontent. Harris offering a certain almost academic manner of the man still firmly doing his job as detective but with a sense of concern for the nature of what forces every man, even himself, to go to such extremes for his own livelihood. When he does infiltrate the organization then Harris portrays James as both working against them but also trying to save them. This in delivering a real passion in the moment of speaking so calmly an urging to not take risky maneuvers and to avoid bringing the law against them. This while showing not a hint of satisfaction when he maintains his position as spy within the ranks of the organization. Eventually this resolves with the men being arrested and sentenced to be executed. I will say this is where the flaws of the film are felt, the biggest one being that Connery's Black Jack I think should've been on more even footing as a lead with a more substantial connection between him and James. The biggest reason for this is the best scene of the film is the final one where we really emphasize this relationship which sadly wasn't given enough time to it. Harris though makes the most of the scene. This as he delivers a powerful sense of empathy in his eyes, but there is also still this certain urge for understanding. This as he speaks with an broken camaraderie. This as he speaks with warmth on their old times together, but a sadness around this. This as Harris conveys the idea of James not exactly knowing what to do with the man he did call friend. He grants the sense of that friendship but also articulates the right modest passion when he tries to understand why Jack didn't stop despite James trying to save him. When Jack finally pushes him though Harris reveals a greater depression in James for what came about his task. This as Harris naturally segues this to a bit of hostility, sensibly as Jack literally attacks him. The hostility though that he paints with a painful shade of grey as man aware both are victims of the same system. Frankly this scene should've gone on for longer, however the strength of the moment suggests what is missing within the rest of the film. This in truly exploring the relationship between both men and really their ideologies on how to escape their plight, one with the system the other against it. Still Harris provides a strong anchor for the film here and really delivers as much as he can within the confines of the piece. It's a very good performance, I just wish the film was a bit more dynamic of a piece overall for him to work with.

Alternate Best Actor 1970: Nicol Williamson in The Reckoning

Nicol Williamson did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Michael Marler in The Reckoning. 

The Reckoning is a mostly effective character study, despite not everything exactly tying together, about an Irish/Englishman businessman dealing with the death of his father.

 

We return to Nicol Williamson, once again teamed with director Jack Gold, as an idiosyncratic figure, though a seemingly different type of man from his self-destructive soldier in The Bofors Gun. Here instead we have his Michael Marler, a successful businessman. We open the film though getting a glimpse of Michael in his relationship with his seemingly quite horrid wife. In this opening the one can already see the sheer command of self that Williamson has a performer that is pretty incredible all its own. This as we have each moment within his wife behavior that is equally disdainful and lusty towards Michael. Williamson's portrayal is brilliant, in presenting in a way both how Michael is complicit within the relationship but also how he isn't exactly interacting in what would deem a healthy one. This in her more immediate insult there is amazing moment in the twitch that Williamson realizes within his face just for a moment to convey how his wife's behavior does irk him. This all the same more verbally unleashing her disdain to match her own though wrapped within this strange lust. Williamson bringing to life an instance the intensity of the relationship. This as Williamson brings the viciousness of a lust based upon this certain hatred, as he lashes out in truth against her barbs towards him as an Irishman, while still prodding him sexually. Williamson's eyes capture a mania befitting the insanity of the relationship and showing the raw lust yet also painful nature of their tryst. 

Williamson artfully changes gears as we see him go off to work. Williamson providing a greater refinement within the man fitting of a proper Englishman living as a businessman. Although with a fantastic intensity within his work, something that Williamson is one of the very best at, as in his eyes there is a strict conviction even just as he drives to get to work on time. Williamson within the office is simply brilliant and absolutely magnetic in crafting the man who moves through organization less like an office worker, and more of a warrior. This as Williamson brings a cutthroat quality within every moment within this sequence. This as he notes every strategy or idea within the company Williamson doesn't just merely say to someone, he seems to almost weaponize the words each time. This with a powerful lack of hesitation or concern. His articulation of every mistake of his boss Williamson brings this certain relish of a kill as though he's a hunter. Williamson treating every moment as though it is a battle within which Michael will eat whatever other dog he needs to survive. Williamson being exceptionally compelling in making this manner though seem so natural to the state of the man. This state of an innate intensity granting the history of a man almost as a sense of the immediate background of coming from a place or at least idea that one must fight to survive. Williamson brings this idea in every moment in showing a man who has fought for his place and aims to keep it. 

Hearing from an injury of his Irish father though Michael must return home, and even as entering to see his sister and mother, it is of a different man. This as Williamson walks with a calmer step and there is a fare more purer kind joy in just his gentle greeting to his mother, than we had seen previously in Michael. This is followed by just an astonishing scene with Williamson as he sees his bedridden father, who has died in the meantime. Williamson brings such a tenderness in the greeting and a complete sense of the affection he feels for his father. In the moment of realizing his father has died Williamson's reaction is heartbreaking as he brings the tears slowly from his eyes, in realizing a man suddenly experiencing more vulnerable emotions that he's likely suppressed in his marriage and job. Williamson's work is simply stunning as he manages to create the moment with such honest of this sort of crafted naturalism within the emotion suddenly hitting the man as the tears begin to flow. Williamson is effectively quiet, in almost showing the boy who once lived within this realm, as we see him deal with his father's sudden death, and later hears of the cause of it from his father's realm, who reveals he was killed in a bar fight by a young hooligan. Williamson is fantastic by actually reducing his own intensity to moments of quiet contemplation of the news, filled with hatred for English police in the story, where Williamson reflects a more submissive and somber state of Michael. 

Without the film stating it right away, what we see of what defines Michael through Williamson's deft performance. This as his heritage as an Irishman, to his English hating father whom he loves. In that Williamson creates two sides to the man, even though both sides Williamson shows is defined by this single aspect that create both sides. This as we follow Michael at home, where he has a brief affair with an older woman (Rachel Roberts). This where we see the tenderness of the young son seemingly trying to connect with his past on a more nostalgic quality. This even as he speaks of his father mainly speaking of his hatred with the English Williamson delivers it with a sentimental quality, earning this as his expression of a man thinking back upon his father whom he loved. This relationship, albeit brief, is contrast to his married one, though with a similar lustful quality within it at times. This also is in stark contrast though when we see Michael return to his job once again in the meantime before his father's funeral, and before he is expected to wreck havoc on the man who caused his father's death. Williamson is again rather astonishing in this sequence, this as he shows still the Irishman's son, as the savage businessman, this as man who designed his life believing, as his father taught him, that he must fight for everything. Williamson is compelling within himself. This in his striking barrage as he takes down a corporate rival and seems to shrink the man just through his verbal edge. This followed by an even greater moment, this just his eyes filled with this pure understated glee for the "kill" as he watches the man further defeated within a meeting. Williamson playing it so perfectly by both being incisive in a moment, then blithe in the next, almost twisting the knife into the other man, as though the man defeat shouldn't take up too much of his time.

Williamson finds a natural complexity though in creating the man that is Michael really is a mess of loyalties, expectations, and circumstance. This as in a later moment Michael ponders on the idea of needing to beat down a man for his father's death. He does this with a very honest and quite normal disbelief and exasperation of the whole idea. This as he expresses a man somewhat aware of being caught within his own strange situation. We see later as we watch him at a dinner party hosted by his wife. Williamson brings this tension within himself as he interacts guest with an increasingly hostile attitude. Williamson playing as man almost trying to attack what they represent to him still, just in his cutting sophisticated way, at first. Eventually Michael recognizes his father by singing a tune, much like his father, and this just an amazing moment for Williamson. This as he sings with a sense of pride in his voice, a sadness in his eyes, but also an awkwardness in his manner in this tribute. This as Williamson in this moment shows the strange tribute that Michael is to his father, this as he is trying to recognize him, but also not quite knowing how to do it. This becoming all the more evident right afterwards with a guest call him Irish in a derogatory way, leading to a rather instinctual violent reaction from Michael. Michael once again being the man designed by his father, in his own very sloppy way. This state of the man though is perhaps best revealed when Michael goes about his "revenge" by finding the young man with the intention of beating him with a blunt instrument. When he gets the man cornered, who pleads for mercy, Williamson's reaction is amazing. This as for a moment all the sense of real empathy and hesitation for the strange action comes to him, albeit briefly before he returns to beat the man for his father's name essentially. Williamson delivers an outstanding performance, particularly since I think he makes better sense of the central idea more so than the film itself does. This in Williamson's portrait of Michael, he creates a captivating realizing of a man defined by his father. This though in finding such complexity that even in a loving relationship, hatred can conspire into a broken man. Williamson not only making sense of this difficult idea but doing so with such masterful precision and power.

Alternate Best Actor 1970: Jason Robards in The Ballad of Cable Hogue

Jason Robards did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying the titular character of the Ballad of Cable Hogue. 

The Ballad of Cable Hogue is a wonderful little western (even if it has early 70's song syndrome) about a drifter who finds a beneficial watering hole after having been marooned in the desert. 

"Cable Hogue" as a film is probably the least Sam Peckinpah movie out of all his film, while also definitely being one of his films. This is as it lacks the extreme violent found in most of his films, there's a little bit of violence but depicted in more of in a classic style western kind of way. It does though have the off-beat energy of his films, though realized in a very different fashion. This being perhaps best realized by the lead performance of Jason Robards as Cable Hogue. Robards actually is an actor who probably doesn't immediately scream western, but of course one of the all time great western supporting turns in Once Upon a Time in the West. A film that this one relates to in a few ways I think, and more than the obvious Robards connection. I guess it is always interesting to see how an actor's presence can change, or the actor can change their presence in a short amount of time. This as Robards is playing a western type here and as he did as Cheyenne in the aforementioned film. The thing is the character's while both very much idiosyncratic, are extremely different in the hands of Robards. This in the earlier film, while actually only being two years earlier, Robards projected a more youthful slick style in the bandit leader of that film. In this film though Robards projects that of a somewhat bitten down old prospector type, closer to Walter Huston in The Treasure of the Sierra Madre. This isn't of course something you need to think about, Robards simply is both character's. Here from the opening scene where he is left marooned in the desert by two companions, who get the better of him because he hesitates to shoot them. 

This opening scene is beautifully used by Robards to wholly establish Cable Hogue. This from just his manner with a Gila monster. This where Robards emphasizes really a tenderness in recognizing the old lizard while recognizing he's going to need to kill him for food. This before being robbed of his only water from the two other men. Robards even in this reaction though portrays really what is a kind of underlying decent nature of Cable that helps to define his performance. This with an earnest honesty in his eyes where he might as well say "come on fellas". This in projecting Cable trying not to go towards the lower act if he can avoid it. Unfortunately this leaves Cable to try to map the desert all by himself in a search for survival. Robards brings so much life, even in this life and death situation. This as Robards just has an abundance of real sense of character in his manner of a man who in a way just goes with what he has, and carries with it a dogged, if still casual demeanor. This as we watch him tread along with a certain exasperation of an older man but also the conviction of one whose found his ways to outlast more than a few trials. Robards's work creates an innate of empathy of this sort of seasoned protagonist, where there is so much life just in his very being due to his performance. This being particularly essential in that so much of the film is centered around us just watching Robards as Cable kind of do his thing. The main plot point actually being another relation to Once Upon a Time in the West as we kind of get the story of the specific land claim in a seemingly desolate area, but here we actually see the progress of this endeavor. 

Robards is great in portraying the man discovering it, naturally even taking in the muddy water he finds as some sort of nectar of the gods. Robards then though is so great here in portraying this remarkable character just in the rather sloppy way we see him set up his business with a makeshift sign. Robards captures a unique energy this as he's both earnest in this while also presenting the very almost bumbling manner of Cable, who is always doing this in his own particular way. It is this style of personality that Robards crafts so vividly in his work that it is just so enjoyable to watch him. The film isn't exactly comedy, in some ways it's kind of a precursor to a Jim Jarmusch style film, therefore where it lives most is in the way the performances bring to life this unique quality. Well Robards does it brilliantly here but not simply, which is particularly important. This as when we get Cable's first "costumer", who tries to kill Hogue rather than pay for water, leaves Hogue to kill the man. Robards is great in the scene portraying no joy in the act rather the certain shame of it, though with also the sense of having been a necessity in the moment. We then follow Cable going to set up his well as business which includes making sure he gets the land claim, after being tipped off by a wholly unscrupulous preacher Joshua (David Warner). Robards's performance very much is the film as he makes the act of getting all the paperwork, while also getting distracted by a local prostitute Hildy (Stella Stevens), compelling through his performance. This as Robards brings so much to every moment of frustration, disbelief at the process but also joy at his success. Also a hilarious bit of wandering eye as he gets a fixation for Hildy. 

The relationship with Hildy which ends up being the center of the film, and again another Once Upon a Time in The West connection. This as we kind of get to see what might've happened if Cheyenne had stayed with Mrs. McBain. Robards is an typical but terrific romantic lead in his own way. This as Robards brings such a playfulness with Stevens that has this overabundance of warmth within the relationship. This striking up this peculiar but wholly winning chemistry between the two. This as Robards offers a sense of sincerity even within the sort of still very Cablelike behavior of being both kind confident and lacking confidence all the same. The two though create such a wonderful pair as there is such a strong sense of love even the certain difficulty has Hildy wants to move from the west, where Cable insists on staying with it in his watering hole that has become basically a pit stop. This staying till the point Hildy leaves him and the two men who marooned him come back in a most unusual showdown. Again it is what is so splendid about Robards's work here. This as again we have the sense of determination in his eyes, but still this demeanor that makes it all so very casual in Robards's hands. It is absolutely great as he brings the intensity in the serious moment of dealing with one who tries to kill him, then he's rather funny in naturally seguing to a rather gregarious manner towards the surviving member. Robards is great in showing it as the wild go with the flow western manner, that is a little messy but gets the job done in his own way. Of course, Spoilers, yet another connection to the Leone film, like Cheyenne, Cable ends up being too symbolic of the west having to go out with it in a rather unexpected way. Of course he befitting the jovial Cable, his exit is hilarious in its casual quality, while being oddly moving all the same. Robards again pulls off both by showing again this sort of "just living his life" manner after an accident leaves him dying, but is moving all the same by showing the man so true to his nature to the very end. This is fantastic performance and really companion work to his portrayal of Cheyenne. Of course the performances themselves are extremely dissimilar in the end, but they are similar as they are both brilliant portrayals of rather different men of the west.

Alternate Best Actor 1970: James Fox in Performance

James Fox did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Chas in Performance. 

Performance is a curious, occasionally overly stylized film, about a violent gangster hiding out from his mob at the home of a faded rocker. 

James Fox, much like his older brother, is most often cast as upper crust English of a certain type. Much like his brother's most famous role The Jackal, we have there a strict departure from that. This is quite evident, in more ways than one, in the the fever dream opening of the film where we get a taste for his Chas in rather lurid detail. This as we hear Fox's distinct cockney accent he brings to the role. Something that he makes wholly natural and helps to detach himself entirely from his typical screen presence. Fox does more than the accent there's a darkness within it. An intensity by itself that creates not only the sense of a less upper class sort, but also the mark of a man whose defined within a darker side of life. This is seen all the more evident when we witness him in a dalliance. This where he enjoys strangulation within the act that we see a vile sadistic glee carry across Fox's face as he shows the nature of Chas. We see a similar manner though as we see him work his way within the mob. Fox's carries himself admirably in granting both a sense of a personal style, while also carrying that certain gaze within his eyes of a killer. This in Fox presenting a man who carries himself as though he is a slick businessman of some kind, while just the brutal thug that is the truth of the man is festering underneath the very thin carpet. 

We see this as Fox portrays a particularly pointed intensity of the man as he quick to ridicule in both hateful words and violence. This quickly leading him to be violently accosted by a superior and his men. This which Chas manages to escape by shooting the man. An actual key scene within Fox's performance. This being the enjoyment that comes across his eyes. This removing any of the quiet darkness, to rather reveal the more vile bliss the man finds within the act of violence. This though leads Chas both to become infamous within the world but also within his organization that wants him taken out due to the action. In order to avoid death he finds a flat he can stay in with the faded rocker Turner (Mick Jagger). Fox being terrific in creating the false face of the man, being technically more like the typical presence of his performances, as he attempts to look like a well to do British gentlemen. Fox is terrific though by presenting that even in these acts it is this sort of fight within himself. This in these slight contortions almost of his expression that shows the violent fiend, between his overly light way of speaking that "he's artist" simply looking somewhere to stay. There's a marvelous moment where we have the true Chas speaking on the phone to an accomplish, while also fielding questions from one of the residents. Fox switching from an affable enough voice to the resident, while immediately becoming himself to the accomplish. This not only in the timbre, but the very way he exudes a certain darkness out of himself by nature, when being himself. 

 

The film at this point however gets into basically a drug induced haze for an extended period, overly extended I'd say. Fox is good in these scenes though in presenting Chas forced out of his comfort zone in the antics of Tuner and his "secretary" Pherber (Anita Pallenberg). This in showing both the man without control in his manner as he's lost within the haze of it, but also the discomfort when prompted to participate. This slowly segues towards his state as a kind of haze that Fox presents though with less of an overt unease. This as we briefly seem to see a satiated man, albeit briefly. The film then really kind of loses itself to style, and doesn't really devise anything to remarkable in that extent nonetheless. This particularly since there is an instant whiplash on the concept of Chas perhaps changing through the experience, well other than the wholly random and rather laughable "what does it mean" ending to the film. Still Fox does deliver on his end in creating a compelling portrayal of a brutal criminal. Although this idea gets lost just as the film does, Fox still manages to stay above water in maintaining the character even as the film loses its mind purposefully. It stands on its own as a strong performance, and best that it was given that the film and the experience evidently helped to contribute to Fox abandoning film acting for six years. 

Alternate Best Actor 1970

And the Nominees Were Not:

James Fox in Performance

Peter Sellers in Hoffman

 

Nicol Williamson in The Reckoning

Richard Harris in The Molly Maguires

Jason Robards in The Ballad of Cable Hogue

 

And a review of:

Alec Guinness in Cromwell

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1994: Results

5. Daniel Auteuil in La Reine Margot - Auteuil gives a good performance in portraying the consistent good nature of his character well conveying also his dire state. 

Best Scene: Being saved by Margot.

4. Michael Wincott in The Crow - Wincott makes the most out of his role by bringing a style and menace with ease, even if it is a limited part. 

 

Best Scene: Gangster meeting. 

3. Bokeem Woodbine in Jason's Lyric - Although I don't think he can entirely overcome the weaknesses of his film, Woodbine still is the best element of the film in his passionate and desperate portrayal of a "bad brother". 

Best Scene: Rejected gift.

2. Delroy Lindo in Crooklyn - Lindo gives a natural and moving portrayal of a goofy, if somewhat under-qualified, dad and passionate, if not stubborn, musician. 

Best Scene: Telling the kids about their mom.

1. Jean-Louis Trintignant in Three Colours: Red - Good prediction RatedRStar. Trintignant gives a brilliant portrayal of curmudgeon slowly finding a way to returning to the loving romantic he once was.

 

Best Scene: In the theater. 

Updated Overall

 

Next: 1970 Lead

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1994: Daniel Auteuil & Jean-Hugues Anglade in La Reine Margot

Daniel Auteuil did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Henri de Bourbon nor did Jean-Hugues Anglade for portraying Charles IX in La Reine Margot. 

La Reine Margot is an effective film that follows the political plots of France between Catholic and protestants built around a sham marriage.

The shame marriage at the center of it being between Isabella Adjani's titular Margot, Catholic sister of the King, and Daniel Auteuil's Henri a protestant. Auteuil's whole appearance seems to be a story in itself. This with his frizzled hair and generally unkempt demeanor. Auteuil only amplifies this within his performance within the marriage scene with the expression of a man whose not quiet sure why he's there, and seems a little lost within it all. Auteuil's performance realizing as a man whose essentially a pawn as the film opens, both for the sake of the supposed alliance but also within his relationship to Margot who initially openly flaunts her intention both not to sleep with Henri but also basically sleep with everyone else she can get her hands on. His performance largely early on brings this right touch of affability with his state of consistent bafflement. He doesn't show a man completely out of his element, but rather one whose nature doesn't make him quite suited towards the situation. This as even when Margot declares her open disregard for their marriage Auteuil portrays just a bit of uncertain confusion rather than any kind of rage. This as he presents a man very much with the awareness of being stuck in not a particularly good situation but attempting to exist in it nonetheless. This situation that is only exacerbated when it turns out the marriage is but a ruse for the hierarchy to slaughter a massive group of the protestants with Henri only just barely escaping the same fate by being forced to convert to Catholicism. 

Auteuil throughout this sequence portrays the same low key fear and more importantly the manner of the man completely out of his element. What he importantly maintains is a general likability within the character's reactions. This with a sense of empathy of a basically a much better man within a circle of vultures that make up the royal court. This creating an innate sense of decency that seemingly makes the natural transition within Margot as she becomes a better person, being horrified by the actions of her family while going to actually save Henri from an assassination attempt. The one actual scene of consummation between Margot and Henri, both actors portray well less as this overture of love between the two however a mutual sense of affection and tenderness within a difficult situation. The two attempt initially an escape however this fails when Henri stays back to rescue the injured King Charles IX during a boar hunt. This though saves Henri alternately as Charles comes to take a liking to the pure of heart Henri. I think what Auteuil's work does is make this exchange a natural one. This as more than anything he portrays a lack of deception within the nature of the man. This presenting even in his interaction with the King no sense of manipulation. This rather Auteuil brings a genuine warmth about just one man caring for another man. This consistently presenting Henri as someone who doesn't care about the politics, has no questionable ambitions as the royal family does, but rather just tries to be a good man. Auteuil makes that an honest trait in his performance, that doesn't make Henri this great hero, just a good man trying to survive and the right thing when he can.  

Now Jean-Hugues Anglade's performance as King Charles actually isn't wholly dissimilar to Auteuil's work in the early scenes of the film. This in that he too portrays a man in some ways very much stuck within a system he doesn't exactly love. This portraying for the first half of the film a certain state of ennui of a man mostly going along with the political machinations of his mother Catherine de Medici (Virna Lisi) with a quiet kind of despair. This not so much for objecting towards her actions exactly but rather being this pawn even as King. Now Anglade while good in these early scenes of the film, he essentially kind of steals the whole film once the essential scene takes place where Henri saves the desperate King being attacked by boars. Anglade in the moment really snapping to attention effectively showing both the visceral personal horror of the moment, and the rapid frustration towards his ambitious brother who largely ignored the situation given he'd take power with Charles's death. Anglade portrays within this a new life of sorts largely through the humanity he brings towards the gratitude he presents towards Henri for saving his life. This including one wonderful moment where he saves Henri's life by not letting him go back to his room where an assassin awaits. Anglade's whole delivery in this scene is masterful in the invitation marks both the genuine sense of affection Charles now has found for the man along with though subtext of trying to keep the man from the assassin. Anglade is wonderful in conveying the whole message in this face to keep Henri alive. 

This is followed by an excellent scene where Charles invites Henri to the room of his mistress for a quiet dinner. Anglade is terrific in this scene by offering so much insight within the character within this scene. This in presenting the only true moment of comfort as he speaks about not having to have his food tested, and showing the contentment of the King living not as one is the man's greatest gift. This while also so bluntly portraying the graciousness of Charles as a host in the moment. This presenting both the act of the man's adoration for being rescued but also the sense within his work that with Henri is one of the few people Charles seemingly can entirely not be suspicious around. This goes further though when Henri speaks towards Charles letting himself and Margot go off to live elsewhere. Anglade's reaction is wonderful as he brings this kind of knowing exasperation towards every moment of the discussion. This showing a man with a far greater knowledge upon the situation of Henri as he speaks with doubtful tones towards whether or not Margot could really exist without the debauchery of the court to enjoy. Anglade giving a great sense of Charles as a man within this world, neither overtly good or bad, but rather existing within the cutthroat place. Of course this backfires upon him soon when a second assassination attempt on Henri is thwarted by Charles again, this time unintentionally as he takes in a slow acting poison intended for Henri by mistake. This followed by what is almost a comical scene of Anglade learning from the court's chemist about the poison. This as his reaction almost has a moment of internalized laughing at the plight he has been given, while also still conveying the horror of the realization. The scenes following being Charles slowly dying from the poison, in a particularly grotesque way as he begins to sweat blood. Anglade's great in these scenes in showing the wretched state within every expression. Anglade conveying the overwhelming pain, but also the emotional distress and bitterness within every accusatory tone towards his family who has left him as such. It must be said Anglade dies well, bringing a certain flamboyance towards the character's unlikely and odd end, that is entertaining while never losing the body horror of the situation. As stated before, Anglade very much steals the film once the character has his turn. This as he makes the most out of the atypical and off-beat monarch, who is a true product of his cruel family both in life and in death.

(Auteuil)

(Anglade)
 

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1994: Bokeem Woodbine in Jason's Lyric

Bokeem Woodbine did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Joshua Alexander in Jason's Lyric. 

Jason's Lyric is a pretty bad film about two brothers who share a mutual trauma. It's largely just absurd melodrama, made worse by some wonky stylistic choices, and seems most interested in just getting to its next sex scene that is more befitting 90's after hours cable than a believable drama. 

Well Bokeem Woodbine is the only good thing about the film, might as well not beat around the bush. Woodbine being one of those actors who has been around forever, but rarely gets the chance to shine past a certain point. The most notable instance of this being his brilliant work as smooth criminal Mike Milligan in Fargo season 2. This is an earlier example of this, much earlier in his career, this time as a less cunning criminal to say the least. Woodbine plays the classic role of the "bad brother" who we first meet, as an adult, as he's getting out of prison yet another time. He is greeted by his bland brother Jason. Woodbine is wonderful in this first scene in just bringing a nice slice of charisma as he smiles in seeing his brother and offering the proper swagger of a gangster, well very much a wannabe gangster here. More than anything it creates enough of an innate likability, given afterwards we will only hear how bad his character is again and again. He receives a less enthusiastic welcome by his mother who is fed up with his behavior. 

Woodbine's good in the scene though in portraying quietly the sense of heartbreak as his expression of fading joy suggests his true sadness over his mother's reaction just as he plays the rest of the moment of casual disregard as though it is nothing. Woodbine finds well the humanity within his character that is easily the most remarkable element of the film. This even as the film is quite repetitive between a lame love story and a lame crime story. The secondary element is better only on the virtues of Woodbine's performance. This even with how we get the same scene of the brother telling the other brother to shape up with the other brother waving off any concerns. Woodbine though is good in developing this sense of lack of responsibility in the character. Woodbine finding an earnestness in the foolishness. This brings the bravado as he says with such bright smiles his intention to continue down the wrong path. Woodbine doing well though emphasizes an underlying potential good nature even in this foolishness in these moments. 

This is consistent until a scene where Woodbine's Josh makes a display of affection for his mother through gifts, all which she rejects based on them coming from drug money. Woodbine is great in this scene as his reaction isn't initially that of an angry gangster, but just a son pointedly needing some reassurance of his mother's love. Woodbine is genuinely moving in his reaction being so simply in relating to the man being a child in the moment looking for love from his mother. The rejection though leads Woodbine to naturally double down on the gangster and reveal the intensity of his anger as it spirals out of control in the moment. Woodbine's work then bringing the sort of needed id to the role as Josh gets out of control through car jacks and participating in bank robbery that only leaves him on the bad end of other gangsters. In each though Woodbine brings the certain sense of raw near insanity about Josh as he goes about each self-destructive activity, showing the lack of sense in every action. This importantly though with that thrust of emotion that propels him towards his own demise. This demise that comes from perhaps the film's worst scene that just is ridiculous with how melodramatic it is. Sadly I think it even undercuts the emotion of Woodbine's final moments with just how ridiculous it is. He tries, but can't overcome the shortcomings of the film. Woodbine often does however overall with this performance. He doesn't salvage the film but at least he's convincing within his own work. Certainly an indicator of talent at the very least, it's a shame it seems he didn't really get to show it off again until over 20 years later.