Monday, 1 June 2026

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 1953: Hans Conried in The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T, Roland Lesaffre in Thérèse Raquin & Isao Yamagata in Gate of Hell & Updated Results

Hans Conried did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Dr. Terwilliker aka the titular character of The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T.

The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T follows a young boy imagining his imperious piano teacher as a dictator of a fantasy world. 

Hans Conried who had a long voice actor career, with probably his most notable role in that vein coming the same year as Captain Hook/Mr. Darling in Peter Pan, was given the rare opportunity for a large live action role here as the Dr. Terwilliker aka Dr. T, the piano teacher of the young boy Tommy, because of course his name is Tommy. Conried makes the most out of it and very much is the one actor in the film who is absolutely certain on how to sell the style of Dr. Seuss in the live action form. Although we do get his subtler version of his performance in the reality scene before Tommy’s dream version as we see the actual teacher Dr. Terwilliker. Conried makes good use of the scene bringing a slightly dramatic manner to his teacher who is deeply concerned that Tommy will not be up to snuff when all his students perform together. Conried though finds just enough a reality in his reactions behind his spoken overtures that shows that this Dr. T is just a slightly dramatic guy, but still just a guy. I think it’s unfortunate that we never really get him to do a final scene with this version of the character but it is what it is. So then we shift to the crazy fantasy world of Tommy’s dream version where Dr. T is a dictatorial master of this strange world, where he hypnotizes Tommy’s mother, and wants Tommy forced to be part of his large orchestra of children forced to play piano. Conried’s performance is the one that understands the tone of the material and more importantly how to sell it. He brings the proper bit of wacky bravado as this version of Dr. T in his over the top costumes and wholly over the top villainous demeanor. Conried is having a blast and it is hard not to have it with him as he sneers at everyone, makes every declaration as though they are the most important words in the world and continually torments Tommy. It’s a fun performance where Conried is both aware of how to play into the over the top qualities of the film while also bringing this certain conviction about everything he does that also sells the world. It is a nicely balancing act that Conried makes look easy. Leading to a nice contrasting climax one where he gets his own song, singing basically about his various overly flamboyant duds where Conried beautifully plays into the vast ego of Dr. T just exuding the ideal sinister job of an evil man who loves being evil. Followed by his defeat scene where Tommy gets the best of him, and Conried again does what he can in making his over the top frustrations as cathartic as he can. Conried creating the sense of that ego loss just as he loses it. Conried consistently is the highlight here, one of the few things not overshadowed by the sets rather he amplifies them, and like the sets, exhibits the potential the film had that sadly most of it is left unrealized. 
Roland Lesaffre did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Riton in Thérèse Raquin. 

Thérèse Raquin follows the titular woman (Simone Signoret) as she embarks on an affair leading to consequences. 

Roland Lesaffre enters very late in the film, in fact initially seems innocuous enough as just a sailor who is sleeping in the train car that Thérèse pretending to be sleeping in, after her lover Laurent (Raf Vallone) killed her husband Camille (Jacques Duby). Lesaffre’s initial scene is very quiet and not particularly showy however he does bring a certain charisma even as his Riton mostly goes along with Thérèse’s claim initially. Lesaffre’s eye performance though is great because you see this internal calculation of the man as though he’s filing something away even as he gives a pretty innocuous answer that seems to put Thérèse in the clear. Of course his Riton is the wrinkle in the plot and the film in the best way possible. Lesaffre instantly brings such a remarkable presence as we unexpectedly visit him again and he does so much with just a few glances as he looks over the information about the death of the man he gave an alibi to. His performance has a fantastic quiet charm about it, mainly by presenting a man who is very much taking ownership of his own questionable ethics, however is doing it in a way that does have a strange allure. Lesaffre enters into the film in a particularly fascinating way because he becomes the star of his own film and has that charisma to back it up. Where we very much become absorbed into his own conflicting noir plot as he decides to blackmail Laurent and Thérèse. Lesaffre comes into this sequence with such a wonderful mischievous quality as he asks for his share. Lesaffre’s fascinating because he really doesn’t accentuate it as an over the top villain and more so a businessman who merely wants his share given he went along with providing protection of their crime. 

Lesaffre’s wonderful as even as he takes some literal physical abuse from Laurent, while still reacting to the pain, his smile afterwards is someone taking in stride as though he understands he’ll get a few punches yet still brings this pleasant conviction of a man who knows he’ll get what he wants from the couple. He’s fascinating because he honestly is just fun to watch here and weirdly pushes the lovers out of the lead spot, and becomes the lead just through sheer presence, even if in the overall scheme of the film he definitely is a supporting role. Lesaffre brings so much life to every bit she has though that it just makes what could be a character just to do a plot point, like say the similar character in The Postman Always Rings Twice, and has this full life of his own. Lesaffre, even within a scene plot wise to set up the final twist of fate, brings so much charm and character as he speaks to a maid to set up a back up plan. Lesaffre brings a wonderful flirtatious energy of someone who is basically seeing a major financial uptick in his future and taking ownership of that joy in every second of the process. Lesaffre importantly letting us in on his scheme essentially and again just having fun with it. I love then the final transaction where we see the duplicitous man go by his word as he accepts the money and he brings in his delivery a strange honesty in his dishonesty of someone who willingly accepts the funds without any intention of breaking his promise, despite having no reason not to keep blackmailing them. Lesaffre makes it more interesting though by presenting a man with his own moral code he goes by leading perfectly to his final memorable scene where a comical misfortune strikes. I love what Lesaffre’s final reaction is because there’s basically a “oops sorry” and in his expression you see that he feels genuinely sorry that the unexpected situation will leave him unable to fulfill the promise he was paid for. Lesaffre delivers a terrific performance that doesn’t just take over the second half of the film, his chaotic presence in the second half elevates the entirety of the film by offering such an unexpected and wholly fresh style that enlivens the last act beautifully. 
Isao Yamagata did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Wataru Watanabe in Gate of Hell.

In Gate of Hell we follow mostly as the violent warrior Endo (Kazuo Hasegawa) becomes obsessed with Lady Kesa (Machiko Kyō), requesting her essentially as a prize from their overlord for his efforts in battle. Of course Lady Kesa is married to Isa Yamagata’s Watanabe. A character and performance I thought I’d highlight because of how antithetical it is to so many samurai performances. Yamagata honestly plays the part as mostly just chill. To the point that even as Endo becomes more aggressive, Yamagata’s performance projects more a bemusement at the insanity of the other guy rather than any sense of jealousy. There’s a degree of concern for his wife but Yamagata always expresses it as concern for her well being and never concern for his “claim” of her in any way shape or form. What Yamagata emphasizes instead is just how healthy of a relationship he and Kesa have. Yamagata is very sincere with her and just has a sense of a loving grace. Even as the outside conflict arises Yamagata’s performance always emphasizes the warmth and love for his wife beyond anything else. No matter what show of it Endo makes, Yamagata presents that Wataru is honestly the ideal husband for Kesa and to break it would be a horrible sin. Yamagata even when reacting to the horrible Endo, presents more of a "this guy needs some mental help" more so than "I hate this guy". This is to the point in the finale when tragedy strikes, I love again that Yamagata’s performance again does not show any hate, to frankly someone who deserves all the hate since the tragedy should’ve been easily avoided, but rather his subdued yet potent reaction is that of just a heartbroken man who has lost his wife. There’s no hate, but again just that sense of love for his wife. It is a subtle and poignant performance by Yamagata because he doesn’t show us your great samurai, jealous husband, or any of that. What he does to define the performance is just a guy who loves his wife, and no matter what the complication might be, that never changes.
 
Next: 1930 Update 

85 comments:

Aharkin said...

Thoughts and ratings on Conried's performance as Captain Hook in Peter Pan?

Luke Higham said...

Delighted with Conreid going up.

Louis: Ratings and thoughts on the cast of Love Letter and any updates to the female rankings.

Luke Higham said...

If anyone's getting a write-up, it might be time to finally cover Lon Chaney (The Unholy Three).

All Quiet On The Western Front (Re-Watch)
L'Age D'Or
Earth
The Unholy Three
Animal Crackers
Ladies Of Leisure
The Divorcee
Anna Christie
Romance
Min And Bill
Sarah And Son
The Devil's Holiday
Prix De Beauté
Paid
Holiday
Westfront 1918
Journey's End
That Night's Wife
I Flunked, But…
The Dawn Patrol
Moby Dick
Street Of Chance
Up The River
The Doorway To Hell

Luke Higham said...

Louis: And ratings and thoughts on supporting performances with a 3.5 or higher.

Michael Patison said...

I know it's unlikely, but any changes on your female top 10s?
Currently:
Lead:
1. Audrey Hepburn Roman Holiday
2. Harriet Andersson Summer with Monika
3. Simone Signoret Thérèse Raquin
4. Anne Vernon Rue de l'Estrapade
5. Machiko Kyō Gate of Hell
6. Delis Garcés Él
7. Geraldine Page Hondo
8. Barbara Stanwyck All I Desire
9. Maggie McNamara The Moon Is Blue
10. Jean Simmons Young Bess

Supporting:
1. Setsuko Hara Tokyo Story
2. Thelma Ritter Pickup on South Street
3. Gloria Grahame The Big Heat
4. Haruko Sugimura Tokyo Story
5. Donna Reed From Here to Eternity
6. Deborah Kerr From Here to Eternity
7. Marilyn Monroe Niagara
8. Chieko Higashiyama Tokyo Story
9. Kinuyo Tanaka Ugetsu
10. Ann Miller Kiss Me Kate

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: Could you add Koreya Senda in Gate of Hell to your ranking?

GM said...

Ronald Colman, The Devil to Pay!
William Powell, Street of Chance

BRAZINTERMA said...

Hello Louis and folks!
Let's talk about some 1953 movie translations in non-English speaking countries. The names that were in Brazil were:

Tokyo Story = Once Upon a Time in Tokyo
Stalag 17 = Hell #17
Ugetsu = Tales of the Pale Moon
From Here to Eternity = One Step Away From Eternity
The Naked Spur = The Price of a Man
The Earrings of Madame de… = Forbidden Desires
The Big Heat = The Corrupts
Roman Holiday = The Princess and the Commoner
Shane = Even Brutes Fall in Love
Summer With Monika = Monika and the Desire
The Band Wagon = The Wheel of Fortune
Sawdust and Tinsel = Circus Nights
Titanic = Titanic Survivors
Kiss Me Kate = Give Me a Kiss
House of Wax = Wax Museum
Él = The Madman
I Vitelloni = The Good-Life
The Caddy = Suffering From the Ball
The Robe = The Sacred Mantle
Niagara = Torrents of Passion
The Moon is Blue = Naive to a Certain Point
Hondo = Rough Paths
Call Me Madam = Her Excellency, the Ambassador
The Wild One = The Savage
Calamity Jane = Spicy Like Pepper
The President's Lady = Destiny Pursues Me

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Louis: Your top 10 acting performances, acting moments and scenes from 1953?

Anonymous said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the production design of the 5,000 Fingers of Dr. T and the cinematography of Little Fugitive.

8000S said...

Louis: The so-called "ultimate focus" lens that Gregg Toland was working on before he died was going to be used by the man himself in a movie called Roseanna McCoy.

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

Since I promised to share my ratings on the cast some time ago here, I watched Alien Resurrection. Honestly not sure what to make of it, it's this weird halfway point between some new interesting approaches to the story and moments that feel too silly and pointless at the base level. Definitely feels worse in comparision to original trilogy.

Weaver-3.5/4
Ryder-2.5/3
Pinon-3
Perlman-3
Dourdan-2.5
Wincott-2.5
Hedaya-2
Freeman-2.5
Dourif-3
Cruz-2.5/3
Orser-3.5

Tim said...

Brazinterma:

From Here to Eternity = Damned until all Eternity
Roman Holiday = A Heart and a Crown
Shane = My Big Friend Shane
The Moon is Blue = Clouds are everywhere (Haven't seen the movie, don't ask why)
Hondo = They call me Hondo
Pickup on South Street = Police Pickup
The Band Waggon = Raise the Curtain!
The Naked Spur = Naked Violence
Titanic = The Sinking of the Titanic
The War of the Worlds = Fight of the Worlds
Tokyo Story = The Journey to Tokyo
Gentlemen Prefer Blondes = Blondes preferred!
The Earrings of Madame de ... = Madame de ...
The Captain's Paradise = The Key to Paradise
Never Let Me Go = It began in Moscow

Matt Mustin said...

Project Hail Mary ratings:
Gosling-5
Huller-4.5
Ortiz-4
Boyce-3.5
Everyone else-3

Harris Marlowe said...

Thoughts on this Peter Sellers bit? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zLEMncv140s

Marcus said...

Louis: Your thoughts on this?

https://variety.com/2026/film/news/martin-scorsese-supports-ai-company-storyboard-movies-1236765037/

Louis Morgan said...

Aharkin:

Conried - (He of course gives two performances, really three in a way by also playing himself being imitated by Pan which even that is a little different. Conried’s performance though just channels the right amount of overt dramatics where he is in a constant swing one way or another. Where we do get moments of violent intensity in the same way, but wonderfully different as his as extreme bits of fear towards the crocodile. Conried shifts with ease as there is some menace he brings just as he’s also so perfectly comical in the pathetic elements. Finding a nice balance such as his quietly sinister delivery of setting up the bomb to kill Peter after promising not to lay a hand or a hook on him. Conried manages to be whatever the part needs him to be and makes it sing. On top of that he’s also good as Mr. Darling, without doing an overtly different voice, but just bringing a different kind of bluster than an earnest warmth at the end that he makes entirely work.)

Luke:

Mori - (A moving performance that is all about creating the sense of the quietly depressed state of the man. Where what Mori mostly does is allude to the heartbreak and the sense of the love the man had that defines his pain. Mori effectively painted that shades between the man completely just exasperated with the notion of love, with the man just deeply hurt and unable to overcome that pain to really exist fully without a degree of the malaise.)

Dosan - (Brings a nice contrasting warmth basically as the guy who wasn’t broken by the war, and brings that specific youthful enthusiasm as the next generation without the pain. His performance offers the right nuanced optimism where he shows that the brother does sense, does understand to the degree he can, but still wants to try to push the others to find happiness despite all the pain of the past.)

Kuga - 4(Who I would say is supporting, offers the contrasting pain of the woman suffering in the same way just with different inputs. Where you see the combination of the same kind of pain but her trying to push it away rather than fester within. Still presenting someone controlled by it in her own way just instead of it being this constant it is a sharper sudden pain that burdens her all the same.)

Uno - (Like Dosan just brings a nice sense of warmth, although as someone with more seasoned quality within it. Has a nice chemistry with Mori and just emphasizes the friend who genuinely cares about his friend.)

Michael:

Swap Simmons for Ava Gardner.

Luke:


Laughton - 4(Just a strong reprise that when you figure out that he’s going to exit the film it couldn't be a worse situation. As he and Simmons have a great sparring chemistry where Laughton’s wonderful in combining a joy of the fighting with that certain petulance that defined his Henry as the man child still just getting what he wants. Sadly the film is about their relationship in the end and the moment he exits the film plummets in quality.)

Cotten - 3.5(Effective in bringing a combination between mentally disturbed and just genuinely distressed. Brings the reality within that tension and intensity. Sadly the film just isn’t concerned enough with him to really make a go of something with it, but he’s good with what he has to work with.)

Louis Morgan said...


Mason - 3.5(Mason with more charm than sinister. A good example of such but he’s not reinventing the wheel with it either.)

Duby - 3.5(Wonderful as the mama’s boy to a painful extreme. Where he does well though is to temper it just enough to show a real man beneath all of his emotional insecurity, even as he is also intolerable in the right way. Showing the childishness in such a convincing way where you see the man fixated on the idea that he should have essentially what his mother says he should have.)

Whitmore & Wynn (Kiss Me Kate) - (They are effective comic relief throughout as just bringing the right over the top gangster manner but subverted in the silliness of some of what they begin talking about. Leading to their big number which they do not waste and are absolutely wonderful to the point of honestly making the best number in the film. They find just the right amount of fun with it while still selling the gangster vibe in a very lighthearted way.)

Powell - (Powell still got the charm. There’s not nearly enough of him, but he brings his specific manner and wit nicely to a few choice lines.)


Ekman - (Really all about his opening scene where he brings the right sort of combination of surprise, with disbelief, then genuine distress, and then genuine care. Key to the greatness of that scene even though he ends up getting pushed to the back afterwards.)

Beatty - (Fun hectoring quality to his work where he grants the right sense of challenging familiarity with March in their scene together, which is easily the best scene in the film, and you really get a good sense of the two having a nice friendly battle that alludes to a mutual disrespect in the right way.)

Buchanan - (Fun over the top director and actor bit. Brings the right absurd level of theater director to everything that he does and particularly that sense of intensity in his eyes whenever he is espousing one of his “genius” ideas.)


O’Connor - (Enjoyed his slightly tempered energy here, one where I thought he found a nice combination between light humor and earnestness that worked well for the film.)

I Vitelloni cast - (All the guys are convincing in their variations and more importantly for the film their combination of what they become as a crew. Contrasted by who each is on their own in little ways.)

Tahmeed:


Performances:

1. Setsuko Hara - Tokyo Story
2. William Holden - Stalag 17
3. Montgomery Clift - From Here to Eternity
4. Thelma Ritter - Pickup on South Street
5. Gloria Grahame - The Big Heat
6. Robert Ryan - The Naked Spur
7. James Mason - Julius Caesar
8. Chishū Ryū - Tokyo Story
9. James Stewart - The Naked Spur
10. Ernest Borgnine - From Here to Eternity

Acting Moments:

1. Final father/daughter-in-law talk - Tokyo Story
2. Confronting the traitor - Stalag 17
3. Why Prewitt quit boxing - From Here to Eternity
4. You’d be doing me a favor - Pickup on South Street
5. Unexpected revenge - The Big Heat
6. Dueling Speeches - Julius Caesar
7. Everyone meets - The Naked Spur
8. Fatso and Prewitt - From Here to Eternity
9. “Ach So” - Stalag 17
10. Daughter-in-law to sister-in-law - Tokyo Story

Scenes:

1. Beautiful tragic dawn - Tokyo Story
2. “When Johnny Comes Marching Home” - Stalag 17
3. Leaving the manor - Ugetsu
4. Long turn around on the hill - The Wages of Fear
5. Pearl Harbor - From Here to Eternity
6. After the bomb - Hiroshima
7. The Army, a clown and his wife - Sawdust and Tinsel
8. Mirror Dance - The Earrings of Madame de…
9. Mouth of Truth - Roman Holiday
10. Prove it - Shane

Louis Morgan said...

Anonymous:

The 5000 Fingers of Dr. T’s PD illuminates an interesting mistake of the later live action Dr. Seuss films, which fail to do the obvious, which is quite simple…just put those Dr. Seuss designs from the page and put them right on screen. That is what the PD is and it is impressive because it just embraces the size, colorfulness, and outlandishness of Seuss and puts into live action reality, and it’s pretty magnificent.

Little Fugitive’s cinematography is one of stunning specific clarity and specific unorthodox design for the time. Offering a different world but also that world presented in such a tangible way thanks to the guerrilla approach. It looks great but also just offers such a specifically fascinating perspective by one being from the child’s view so effectively but also it just chooses to show us the world at the time without frills.

8000’s:

Interesting it’s a shame we never got to see it.

Harris:

I knew that was going to be the bit before I followed the clip. Which honestly is in most ways more so an Olivier parody than really anything on the Beatles. The comedy is just doing Olivier’s style of delivery with Beatles, which I’m always up for a good Olivier impersonation and Sellers does the Richard III with such ideal articulation with just the right tinge into the absurd.

Marcus:

AI is more complicated I think than either the for or against will say. As I wouldn’t say a complete ban is realistic but to ignore all the negatives also is DEFINITELY not the way. My hope is what Scorsese is talking about is saving time with things he would’ve done himself. Like if you can make storyboards faster for yourself, that you would’ve made yourself, I do think that’s different than removing an artist. Having said that, I think it is unfortunate that there is no mention of any concerns regarding AI with those statements and just outright positivity sends the wrong message overall particularly with Soderbergh and Aronofsky (though I’m far less surprised with those two) also giving their stamps of approval.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: Was Mori a 4 or 4.5.

Louis Morgan said...

Luke:

4.

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: You gave a 4 to Pickup on South Street on your Film Thoughts blog, would you still give it that rating? If so, where would it rank on your 1953 list? If not, what rating would you give it now?

Harris Marlowe said...

Louis: Were there any specific factors that you noticed in your rewatch that led to your switching Holden from Lead to Supporting? And thoughts on the script and direction of Stalag 17?

Louis Morgan said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi

Matt Mustin said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi. Just awful.

Luke Higham said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi, heartbreaking. Persepolis is one of my all-time favorite texts, and I'd struggle to name even a few others that mean as much to me personally.

ruthiehenshallfan99 said...

Rip Marjane Satrapi

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi

RatedRStar said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi

Shaggy Rogers said...

RIP Marjane Satrapi

Shaggy Rogers said...

Hey guys
Before wrapping up 1953, I want to share an interesting fact with you. I noticed that Wilder became a Double Premium director, which is when a filmmaker has directed films starring actors who have won Louis' overalls.
So Wilder managed to get 2 wins in Lead (MacMurray and Milland) and 2 in Supporting (Robinson and Holden). Other directors who have achieved this Double Premium title include: Curtiz, Hitchcock, Kurosawa, Lean, Coppola, Coens and McDonagh.

J96 said...

Rest In Peace Marjane Satrapi.

Louis Morgan said...

Lucas:

Somehow I just kept missing both when creating the list, then later rating the leftover 53 films.

Harris:

Re-watching the film I just saw that he ends up in a DDL in Gangs situation, where the strength of his performance and presence makes him feel like lead, though the screentime, perspective and overall scope of the film doesn’t actually support it. In this instance, re-watching it, the life of the camp is as important as the mole story, and within that we focus on many in the camp, not just Sefton. Strauss having more screentime doesn’t make him lead, but is evidence of the film being the overall portrait of the camp, and the mole being an essential part but not the only part.

The screenplay succeeds with multiple intentions. The first is just creating the intrigue of the mystery, by devising multiple suspects with all the unraveling bits of that being a tight journey with each twist within it leading to the extremely cathartic conclusion. Being a great mystery though is intertwing it with the journey of Sefton of the man who might be completely selfish and you see a specific arc of what that means from exploiter to hero…with maybe just a small tinge of exploitation in his heroic action. Something that made me love Holden’s performance all the more is the silence conveying of what actually became isolated fully from the group, no longer by being the smartest scrounger but rather the outsider. The screenplay puts in those key moments of the beating, the taking his wine, the being the only one not in on the song, which then Holden runs with to show just enough crack that Sefton does care even if he wouldn’t readily admit it to anyone. When the plot climax comes it naturally intertwines with the character climax, the ideal type. Then there is the world of the prison where the success is all the little details throughout between the differences in the roles each serve, and even just how the men get by in their less than ideal circumstances. An idea where we do get the escape of comedy, sometimes lighter like Animal and Shapiro, but also darker like the dear John letter the man receives and “believes it”. It is also the reality of it, particularly the moments with Joey where you do see the weight of the world, that the men are living in and just have to bear it. The film creates a world in itself, a very detailed world to exist in with also a compelling plot to show us the way through.

Wilder’s direction is a great “how to” guide on how to direct a stage adaptation. As much of it is about expanding, showing off the size and scope of the prison, making use of visual storytelling in all of the segues between interior sequences, giving very specific detail in the construction of the prison, particularly the weather and the mess of it. All of that seems just natural realization and never extra just to take things outside. What’s amazing is how much he is able to do on the inside of the stalag. Wilder’s blocking, composition and movement within every one of these scenes really is just incredible because he is able to convey both crowds while never being confused or static. It moves, yet the tightness of the space is always present. The “Johnny Comes Marching Home” is just genius use of a limited space in a way that fills it with so much life while also keeping the sense of the limit space alive. It is a balancing act that Wilder pulls off flawlessly, never making confusion, yet seeming refined to the point of losing that intimacy. It’s amazing work purely on that front alone. And that is of course not even considering that when Wilder is going for comedy, dark comedy, drama, intrigue, intensity, he does it all with ease.

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

Louis: I reckon this is one of the rare occasions where your Supporting wins would be ranked higher than both of your Lead wins in a year?

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: Your thoughts on the cast of Backrooms? And have you seen the web series it's based on?

Anonymous said...

Louis: Also your thoughts on the cast of Hokum.

Calvin Law said...

Louis: I think Stalag 17 is along with High and Low, and really most of Ozu's work, my prime examples of how to make blocking within such cramped enclosed spaces work beautifully. Wondering if you can think of any other examples?

And efore we move on from 1953, how about these retro cast for Pickup on South Street, and The Big Heat?

Skip: Tyler Okonma
Candy: Millie Alcock
Moe: Youn Yuh-jung

Bannion: Kyle Chandler
Debby: Ana de Armas
Vince: Tom Burke

Anonymous said...

Louis: The Miracle Worker and Hud are still the only two films to win two acting Oscars without being Best Picture nominated, what do you make of that? Maybe notable in how they might have ended up having more passion behind them than some of the nominees (like no crossover between Picture and Director besides Lawrence and Mockingbird in 1962 and Hud also winning Best Cinematography). Wonder if DeWilde was close to taking Nick Adams' spot.

Marcus said...

I think Holden's lead placement at the Oscars was also determined by the fact that he was such a star, and they would never think of nominating him in Supporting.

Tahmeed Chowdhury said...

RIP Anthony Head

Luke Higham said...

RIP Anthony Head
I'll remember him mostly for Buffy The Vampire Slayer.

RatedRStar said...

RIP Anthony Head

RatedRStar said...

A testament to his underrated ability to play a warm mentor role in Buffy combined with playing such a detestable villain in Ted Lasso.

Louis Morgan said...

Tahmeed:

Yes, though in this instance both are substantial roles in ensembles.

Lucas:

I have not.

Ejiofor - (As the generally frustrated guy he’s fine though as Eijofor’s performances go it wasn’t one where I thought he really distinguished any of it too notably. When going through the rooms he’s more than decent in conveying the combination of intrigue with fear at everything he’s checking out. Unfortunately the film has basically a leap to his character being at an extreme, an extreme that I think Ejiofor with maybe more assured direction and more of a buildup could’ve achieved, but here I just found it lacking. He’s definitely trying in the scene but it just felt more like playing crazy then really convincing me of the madness overtaking his character.)


Reinsve - (Mostly she just needs to be a bit emotionally exhausted then scared yet with a little steel. She delivers on everything needed of her, but definitely not her most interesting performance.)

The rest - (Are in the movie)

Anonymous:

Scott - (Probably would lower to a 3.5 as I would say Scott doesn’t quite have the specific charisma needed for such an unlikable character so early on. Otherwise though I do think he’s effective though not amazing in portraying the combination between intrigue, existential fear and actual fear with decent variations throughout the narrative. He ends up making a decent protagonist of the ilk, though I wouldn’t say he fully captivates where you feel fully brought along his emotional journey.)

Coonan - (Standard performance where his character goes in the scheme of the film. I didn’t think he stood out in an extremely positive or negative fashion.)


Wilmot - (Always most welcome particularly when given a decent role as he has here. Bringing this combination of a little bit of daffy insanity, some real pathos but also some genuine warmth. Wilmot fleshing out the philosophy effectively where he does come at it in an unexpected way, but does so where he convinces you of this man and his particular history. Bringing just a sincerity within the scheme of the film which is most welcome.)

Ordesh - (In many ways brief but delivers in granting some sense of the secret her character holds while bringing a quiet empathy then later the specific brief intensity of fear.)


Conroy - (All about just his scene of exposition which he delivers quite perfectly with just all the horribleness and creepiness to it. Bringing it as just a twisted storyteller where he blends between a warning and a bit of sadism.)

O’Connell - (Brings a quiet sincerity as the genuinely interested fan so to speak, then brings a contrasting sense of earned frustration afterwards. Also though delivers on his other performance in just being creepy by playing it up with such a slightly twisted yet directly still delivering on the very odd premise of that character.)

Louis Morgan said...


Calvin:

Le Trou, The Hill, In the Mood for Love and even more so 2046.

That would be an interesting role for Okonoma and maybe just the right one for a leading turn for him. As he certainly has the presence and hustler quality needed. Alcock would be an interesting slightly chaotic alternative I think. Youn would be perfect of course.

Chandler certainly has the right “knight” quality for the part, and probably would lose it a bit more than Ford did, to the story’s benefit. De Armas would be a different avenue for her, and I could see her pulling it off. Burke can obviously do some nice slime, so would be a good fit there.

Anonymous:


I think you can’t discount the studio push for certain films, to the point it’s a shame we can’t see the actual "receipts" of nominations. I wonder if some voters only voted in pictures as almost studio seeds and really didn’t bother with other categories leading to those discrepancies. As you have many big studio films that probably shouldn’t have been there that support this certain trend, like Mutiny on the Bounty, Cleopatra, Doctor Dolittle, Hello Dolly!. All “tech” films but more importantly all expensive that got in over smaller films like Hud and The Miracle Worker. And maybe it was just the money of the campaign, maybe it was the specific push for picture to help with marketing, but I think the certain “need” for those films to make into picture, as part of overall marketing and needing to make money, probably helped to create that discrepancy.

Marcus:

Yes, essentially if you were a star you had to be campaigned lead for a very long time, that is why Brando is in there for an obviously supporting role. To the point Clift and Garland’s supporting nominations for Nuremberg caused controversy.

ruthiehenshallfan99 said...

Louis, have you considered watching Monte Carlo for your 1930 movies?

Anonymous said...

Louis, how do you rate...
Greta Gerwig in Jackie
Sally Hawkins in Spencer
Alba Rohrwacher in Maria
:)

Matt Mustin said...

Watching the first season of Andor and it's nuts that this got no acting Emmy nominations.

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: What are your ratings and thoughts on Michael Wilding in Torch Song, Peter van Eyck, Folco Lulli and William Tubbs in The Wages of Fear, Charles Laughton in Salome and Oscar Levant in The Band Wagon?

Harris Marlowe said...

Anonymous: I can't find his rating for Hawkins but he gave Gerwig a 2 and Rohrwacher a 4.
https://actoroscar.blogspot.com/2017/02/alternate-best-supporting-actor-2016_14.html
https://actoroscar.blogspot.com/2024/12/alternate-best-actor-1986-results.html

Tim said...

season 3 of Six Feet Under is certainly a season of tv that exists.
It's actually comical how little happened here, Many of the characters are at pretty much the same point they were at the end of the last season. And after the really cool first episode, it took a whopping TEN for anything genuinely interesting to happen again, despite the presence of one Ben Foster. Only to then in the öast three episodes have all the interesting stuff happen to literally all the characters at once, which made me especially happy fro Frances Conroy, as i was appalled what they were doing with her for the most part of this season. Other than that, they pretty much completely dropped the dream sequences and the deaths have barely any plot relevance anymore, they almost seem completely random.

MVP Lili Taylor ... i guess?

J96 said...

Louis, I only saw ep 1 (though I had the ending spoiled), but did you watch Euphoria season 3? Thoughts? Rankings?

Harris Marlowe said...

Luke: Would you be alright with posting a link to your Final Additions list, if you have it as a Google Docs file?

J96: Don't think he even watches Euphoria.

Robert MacFarlane said...

Louis: What do you think of the scene in Peter Pan of Mr. Darling calming down while putting Nana outside? That’s my favorite scene in the film.

8000S said...

Your thoughts on this quote from Zack Snyder.

"You could call it “high-brow” comics, but to me, that comic book was just pretty sexy! I had a buddy who tried getting me into “normal” comic books, but I was all like, “No one is having sex or killing each other. This isn’t really doing it for me.” I was a little broken, that way. So when Watchmen came along, I was, “This is more my scene.”"

Tony Kim said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Luke Higham said...

Harris: I really appreciate your interest but I personally want to finish it before releasing it.

Tony Kim said...

Louis: Strictly regarding its uses in the film industry, why do you feel a complete ban on AI is unrealistic?

Louis Morgan said...

Ruthiehenshallfan99:

I suppose.

Lucas:

Wilding - (Basically plays the note of sorrowful but graceful throughout the film. Basically as opposed to Crawford the whole time. He hits it decently, but isn’t all that dynamic. Nor would I say he bridges any gap between himself and Crawford to create a genuine chemistry between the two that makes sense of the narrative.)

Van Eyck & Lulli - (Both their performances are constructed where every man is coming through quickly. Van Eyck conveys perhaps the greatest principled state of the four men with this quiet conviction about the man’s manner and intention right down to constructing the bomb. It isn’t as though he’s doing for the “right” reason but rather exudes someone who has seen so much there’s no false notions he puts forth. Lulli on the other hand brings an earnest eagerness of someone who will die without the job so presents a more happy go lucky demeanor throughout as the man where it is his only chance anyways therefore the way he conveys the weight of the situation is very different.)

Tubbs - (Tubbs just brings the American brass conveying though a directness that manages to have some minor care within certain moments while also just being bluntly honest with everything that he says. Making what could’ve been a bit more one note villain, as someone more genuinely with a bad job but trying to a degree of being forthright.)

I believe I covered Laughton before.

Levant - (Seems to be his usual presence which is this slightly exasperated manner as a sidekick, where he delivers that nicely enough and works as a contrast to his more overtly eager co-stars.)

Robert:

The scene basically is revealing that Mr. Darling really is just all hot air but warm at heart. As we get the classic sad dog look, however I do like that within Conried’s delivery and the dialogue Mr. Darling is really just realistically human both in the come down from a moment of stress but even in his explanation he is trying to be as genuine as possible in his explanation. Really subvert the usual stern dad moment, as in the moment of his harshest action we suddenly see him at his most human.

8000’s:

I would say the level of depth of his detailing of the appeal he saw in Watchmen pretty much explains the surface level adaptation we got with his Watchmen.

Tony:

For a few reasons. One, it is impossible to track all AI use. Screenwriters/Art directors/Costume Designers could use it for research, or the start of certain works and you’d never know one way or the other. For example Sinners used it for part of its costume design process and no one was the wiser until they admitted to it. Same with the very specific sound editing in the Brutalist. There’s some AI use you can detect but not all with general freedoms in mind. If it is a part rather than the whole it becomes particularly hard to detect. Two you can’t ban it anyways from lower budget non-Union productions at any level anyways. Three there are certain uses of AI that people will be less inclined to push back on when it performs a task that wasn’t exactly done by humans due to being too inefficient or difficult. For example that specific vowel changing in The Brutalist. Audio editing obviously previously existed but that ultra specific adjustment really wasn’t something attempted in that likely because it would’ve been so hard. Now there will be those who push back against it still, but again if filmmakers see it as a new tool in particular, not as a replacement but an entirely new method many likely will want to use that method…as already proven with several directors…and that wasn’t even with the type of thing I’m talking about here.

Harris Marlowe said...

Luke: Then would you be opposed to sharing what you have for specific years that have already been covered by bonus rounds? I'm curious about '96 and '99 as there are a few performances I've been considering requesting from those years.

Bryan L. said...

Louis: Which actresses do you think would've had more of the ethereal quality needed for Ingrid in Kiss of the Spider Woman instead of Jennifer Lopez?

Shaggy Rogers said...

Hey guys
If Louis were to make a post about the Alternate Best Actor of 1930, what five names would he include? My picks:

Emil Jannings - The Blue Angel
Louis Wolheim - Danger Lights
Lew Ayres - The Doorway to Hell
William Powell - Street of Chance
Ronald Colman - The Devil to Pay! (plus his performance in Raffles)

Louis Morgan said...

Bryan:

Bérénice Bejo

Lucas Saavedra said...

Louis: What are your ratings and thoughts on Michael Patric in Hokum and the cast of Ugetsu? I looked them up and I couldn't find them

Harris Marlowe said...

Luke: Ehhh... I'm not quite sure about sharing my email publicly, but let me think about that.

Tony Kim said...

Louis: But do you feel the specific instance with The Brutalist was necessary, and preferable to not altering their accents at all? Would you personally be in support of AI being used for such purposes in films, divorced from the feasibility of a ban? And I say "in support of", as distinct from recognizing it as "different from removing an artist".

BuscemiFan said...

Hey Louis, what are your thoughts on the Simpsons episodes Lisa the Beauty Queen and Lisa vs Malibu Stacy?

Luke Higham said...

Harris:
https://actoroscar.blogspot.com/2010/01/best-supporting-actor-1959.html?m=1

Harris Marlowe said...

Luke: OK, thanks. I don't have enough time right now for a full look at it, but I'll just make one quick suggestion at a cursory glance which is that you should consider removing Rickman in Dogma. If you haven't seen it, I'd say he's the best part of the film, but there's just not that much to say about him and it's not like one needs to see the film just for his performance.

Anonymous said...

Louis any final thoughts on 1953 as a year for film overall?

Luke Higham said...

Harris: I'll keep that in mind.

Louis Morgan said...

Lucas:

Patric - (Delivers on a semi-tough guy act but didn’t leave too much of an impression beyond that.)

Mito & Tanaka - (In the first act of the film they each fill a similar role of just reacting to their husband’s foolishness in different ways. Mito being more overtly comedic and quite effectively so. Tanaka there is a degree of the comedic in her exasperation but also contrasts in painting a bit more of just the reality of desperately needing to work with her husband’s foolishness. When the film continues Mito's role is effectively this combination between the real emotion of her desperation though with an increasingly darkly comic aspect that she manages to realize in a way that balances the tone of it. Never losing humanity but also finding the absurdity of it. Tanaka’s work on the other hand then comes in as this direct warmth that ends up being haunting as she makes it even purer in her last appearance as you no longer see the weight of the world in the sense but as strongly as ever the strength of the woman’s loving concern.)

Ozawa - (Enjoyably stupid throughout in finding enough variations of this hot head desperation. Particularly as we see the advancement with this reckless energy of the man just going with the flow yet somehow finding success no matter how stupid his movements are. Ozawa delivers on the strange contrast particularly as he switches from a small foolishness to the “great man” bluster, before finding the final note in the man falling into his old ways when he meets his wife again.)

Kyo - (Her performance is entirely about this strange presence that is bizarre in a way that is fascinating. As her allure isn’t at all typical. It is always off in some way yet even in the way her manner, her voice, everything is unusual, it is unusual in a way that is magnetic even as it is off-putting at the same time.)

Tony:

I do think Jones’s accent in particular in the pure Hungarian scenes was better than usual attempts of the non-native language speaker speaking the native language. Having said that, no I don’t think it was needed and I don’t support it. The easy question is always, would you support it on a larger scale? For example, say you had a whole film where Tom Hanks was speaking in German that AI altered, no I would not want to see it, so no I don’t support its use in The Brutalist either as a general rule. And even with the slight improvement of accent offered to the film it was actually distracting to the public perception of the film and the performances. We got on without it for almost a century of sound cinema, I don’t think we need it now.

BuscemiFan:

Lisa the Beauty Queen is a great episode, an example of the necessary heart of the best Simpsons episode in this instance not only Homer’s sacrifice to improve Lisa’s self-image but even Bart’s “You’re not ugly” scene. Beyond that plenty of hilarity from the actual pageant, to the Menthol Moose, to the nerd attack and of course Barney’s ill-fated Blimp ride.

Lisa vs. Malibu Stacy has just enough of a story of Lisa trying to improve messages to girls, which the Spider-man doll is highlight joke wise, and mostly this in the end works via the jokes, “you all have hideous hair…from a design point of view”, GI Joe, Smither’s computer start up, and Grandpa’s side story, particularly Homer’s summing up the demographic contrast of why people listen to him.

Louis Morgan said...

Anonymous:

The top five is one of my favorite top fives ever quite frankly. I love all those films that are successful in such different ways, tones and overall approaches to film. Beyond the top five, there are certainly other good films, but as a whole isn’t all that great. One where you see a combination of filmmakers genuinely pushing the envelope and others just flopping into a standard dull approach of the time.

Luke Higham said...

Harris: Would Rickman be a 3 or 3.5 for you.

Harris Marlowe said...

I guess a 3.5. From what I recall, he's a fairly amusing deadpan snarker then brings a bit of honest emotion into it later on, but not really given the chance to flesh things out a bit more.

Ytrewq Wertyq said...

Luke: Not to be persnickety all out of sudden, but I have seen Stir of Echoes and Bacon is just a 3 for me.

Luke Higham said...

Ytrewq: That's fine, again word of mouth will help downsize it further.

Matthew Brown said...

Louis, if he's not a 4 already, could George Sanders go up for The Jungle Book.

Matthew Brown said...

Louis, I'm late on this but what was your rating for Antonio Banderas in Shrek 2.

Luke Higham said...

Louis: With mine and Daniel's birthday recommendations (Peace On Earth and The Old Man And The Sea) on Monday, you don't mind starting off with the former because the latter has a much higher ceiling.

Jonathan Williams said...

Louis: Thoughts on the Social Reckoning trailer.

Anonymous said...

Louis: Your thoughts on these Oscar-nominated songs?

- “Let the River Run
- “Again”
- “It Might Be You”
- “Endless Love”
- “Nobody Does It Better”
- “Run to You”

Louis Morgan said...

Matthew:

Feel comfortable with Sanders's rating.

Jonathan:

Looks fine, if not anything overly amazing either. It's a shame Eisenberg felt he had to separate himself from the part because I do think all of it would've hit harder, particularly using the original score, if he had come back. Having said that Strong thankfully doesn't seem to be going too hard on playing the mannerisms of Zuckerberg, and appears to be less jarring than I was expecting. Otherwise, Madison and White both look decent at least, and seems like it could work as a straightforward procedural if maybe lacking the spark the original film had.

Marcus said...

Louis: What are some acting races in Oscar history where you feel the strength of the winner's film played the most important part in securing their win, rather than quality of performance?