character as well as he really could be.
Robert Shaw in The Sting
Max Von Sydow in The Exorcist
Showing posts with label 1973 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 1973 Best Supporting Actor. Show all posts
Tuesday, 1 November 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Results
character as well as he really could be.
Robert Shaw in The Sting
Max Von Sydow in The Exorcist
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Vincent Gardenia in Bang the Drum Slowly
Vincent Gardenia received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Dutch Schnell in Bang the Drum Slowly.
Bang the Drum Slowly depicts a star pitcher on a baseball team who tries hard to help his friend simple catcher who has a terminal disease.
Vincent Gardenia portrays the team manager Dutch who is unaware why the star pitches Henry (Michael Moriarty) wants the simple catcher Bruce (Robert De Niro) to catch for him, but he intends to find out. The exasperated sports team manager certainly is not the most original of character and Gardenia never tries to portray this type of character in an particularly unusual fashion.
Gardenia though does manage to play Dutch just as he should be as well. Dutch is a tough manager who wants to handle his team his way, and does not much care for being told he won't have control over his lineup. Gardenia gets the constantly frustrated style of Dutch down just right. He also handles the frustrations of Dutch just wanting to figure what the deal is with Henry and Bruce is exactly well as well.
Gardenia mostly is simply consistent in his performance through the film but he does have a single big scene when he finds out what really is wrong with Bruce. He has a nice heartfelt scene where he shows that Dutch maybe is a bit of a softie at heart. Gardenia is appropriate earnest in this scene and does not seem fake either being honestly saddened by a member of his team dying that does not override the rest of his performance, but more of suggests his toughness toward his team is simply the way he has to do it.
Gardenia's performance is never an amazing one, but he does seem to get the most out of Dutch as a character. He does not take a completely unorthodox approach to the role, but Gardenia is effective in all of his scenes, and adds a nice presence to the film. I can't say it is ever all that much, or even especially memorable but it is a good performance.
Vincent Gardenia portrays the team manager Dutch who is unaware why the star pitches Henry (Michael Moriarty) wants the simple catcher Bruce (Robert De Niro) to catch for him, but he intends to find out. The exasperated sports team manager certainly is not the most original of character and Gardenia never tries to portray this type of character in an particularly unusual fashion.
Gardenia though does manage to play Dutch just as he should be as well. Dutch is a tough manager who wants to handle his team his way, and does not much care for being told he won't have control over his lineup. Gardenia gets the constantly frustrated style of Dutch down just right. He also handles the frustrations of Dutch just wanting to figure what the deal is with Henry and Bruce is exactly well as well.
Gardenia mostly is simply consistent in his performance through the film but he does have a single big scene when he finds out what really is wrong with Bruce. He has a nice heartfelt scene where he shows that Dutch maybe is a bit of a softie at heart. Gardenia is appropriate earnest in this scene and does not seem fake either being honestly saddened by a member of his team dying that does not override the rest of his performance, but more of suggests his toughness toward his team is simply the way he has to do it.
Gardenia's performance is never an amazing one, but he does seem to get the most out of Dutch as a character. He does not take a completely unorthodox approach to the role, but Gardenia is effective in all of his scenes, and adds a nice presence to the film. I can't say it is ever all that much, or even especially memorable but it is a good performance.
Best Supporting Actor 1973: John Houseman in The Paper Chase
John Houseman won his Oscar from his only acting Oscar nomination for portraying Professor Charles W. Kingsfield Jr.
The Paper Chase depicts the troubles and the success of a first year Harvard Law student.
John Houseman was better known as a film producer than a film actor before his performance here. He was only in a single feature length film before this one in a rather small role. Here though it is no surprise that Houseman was nominated and won since the Oscars do seem to like it when people act even if that person is better known for something else and the role of Professor Kingsfield is an incredibly showy role.
Kingsfield rules over his room with absolute control with his loud distinct voice, and commonly humiliates those who do not meet the requirements of his questions during the class. After this there is little to say actually about Kingsfield you learn very little of him outside the class, what you do learn is never portrayed by Houseman's performance instead they are merely said by others. When you do see him outside the classroom he acts just as he does inside the classroom with the same superior attitude.
Houseman is calm cool collected as well as commanding in the role I can't say he is all that much more than that. He always gives the same smug glances the same piercing looks in every scene there is no change in behavior ever nor should there be as that exactly how Professor Kingsfield is written to be. That does not mean he is amazing at all, I always felt he was just fine, but this never became that entertaining or interesting performance as relatively simple performances like this can be sometimes. I do frankly think though many scenes he could have brought out an appropriate degree of humor in his performance something that someone like John Gielgud probably could have done with ease. He is most certianly never bad, but I just never really found him to be worthy of acting awards good either.
John Houseman was better known as a film producer than a film actor before his performance here. He was only in a single feature length film before this one in a rather small role. Here though it is no surprise that Houseman was nominated and won since the Oscars do seem to like it when people act even if that person is better known for something else and the role of Professor Kingsfield is an incredibly showy role.
Kingsfield rules over his room with absolute control with his loud distinct voice, and commonly humiliates those who do not meet the requirements of his questions during the class. After this there is little to say actually about Kingsfield you learn very little of him outside the class, what you do learn is never portrayed by Houseman's performance instead they are merely said by others. When you do see him outside the classroom he acts just as he does inside the classroom with the same superior attitude.
Houseman is calm cool collected as well as commanding in the role I can't say he is all that much more than that. He always gives the same smug glances the same piercing looks in every scene there is no change in behavior ever nor should there be as that exactly how Professor Kingsfield is written to be. That does not mean he is amazing at all, I always felt he was just fine, but this never became that entertaining or interesting performance as relatively simple performances like this can be sometimes. I do frankly think though many scenes he could have brought out an appropriate degree of humor in his performance something that someone like John Gielgud probably could have done with ease. He is most certianly never bad, but I just never really found him to be worthy of acting awards good either.
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Randy Quaid in The Last Detail
Randy Quaid received his only Oscar nomination so far for portraying Larry Meadows in The Last Detail.
Randy Quaid plays the arrested Seaman who "Bad Ass" Buddusky (Jack Nicholson) and "Mule" Mulhall (Otis Young) have to bring to the brig. Larry Meadows is a young wet behind the ears kleptomaniac. Quaid is absolutely quiet for a good amount of time during the film. Quaid just shows Larry to be a very sad, very modest fellow, who just steals things basically just to steal them there is barely a purposeful criminal intent, he just does not know any better.
With this Quaid creates an appropriate sympathy for Larry because Larry is such a pathetic guy. He never makes Larry's problems seem at all malicious nor does he make his inexperience seem unrealistic or annoying. There is a genuine naivety to Quaid's performance that works well for the film, and makes the sympathy Badass and Mule gain for him properly believable. I particularly liked when he goes to his home where no one is that just shows the sad state of Larry that Quaid has shown it to be something he has pretty much accepted.
After setting up this characterization though Quaid really has very little to do. Most of the time he just reacts with a very modest and sad response to the behavior of Badass. He has a few moments where he freaks out an makes some impulsive escape attempt, which Quaid shows exactly what it is, but other than that there really is not anything that special about his reactions. Quaid is as he is, he really does not show change or growth nor should he the experiences Badass give to him are not the sort that would make him a new man. Its a good performance that serves its purpose, it is also a limited one though just by the nature of it, and just like Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger Quaid never takes a scene away from Jack Nicholson.
With this Quaid creates an appropriate sympathy for Larry because Larry is such a pathetic guy. He never makes Larry's problems seem at all malicious nor does he make his inexperience seem unrealistic or annoying. There is a genuine naivety to Quaid's performance that works well for the film, and makes the sympathy Badass and Mule gain for him properly believable. I particularly liked when he goes to his home where no one is that just shows the sad state of Larry that Quaid has shown it to be something he has pretty much accepted.
After setting up this characterization though Quaid really has very little to do. Most of the time he just reacts with a very modest and sad response to the behavior of Badass. He has a few moments where he freaks out an makes some impulsive escape attempt, which Quaid shows exactly what it is, but other than that there really is not anything that special about his reactions. Quaid is as he is, he really does not show change or growth nor should he the experiences Badass give to him are not the sort that would make him a new man. Its a good performance that serves its purpose, it is also a limited one though just by the nature of it, and just like Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger Quaid never takes a scene away from Jack Nicholson.
Monday, 31 October 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Jason Miller in The Exorcist
Jason Miller received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Father Damien Karras in The Exorcist.
Jason Miller although in the supporting category here could really have been placed in lead considering he most certainly is the male lead of the film, I do not mind his supporting placement all that much though, since there are good amount of scenes that do not have him in it nor do the involve him. Karras though is a pivotal character of the film as he has a personal journey that is given a good deal of time that coincides with Chris Macneil (Ellen Burstyn) coming to the conclusion that her daughter Regan (Linda Blair) is in fact possessed by a demon rather that having a psychological problem.
For most of the film Miller's performance is an intensely quiet and subtle performance. His early scenes depict his problems dealing with the sickness and eventual death of his mother. It actually could have been very easy to have overplayed these moments but Miller is more effective by showing that the death of his mother troubles Karras greatly. The sadness and loss of faith in Karras is never portrayed in some huge outcry in his performance rather it is something deeper which Miller portrays in a very haunting way.
Karras though is forced to face his duty as a priest and his faith with the idea of the Exorcism and the possessed girl. Miller is terrific in his first scene with the demon as he at first is rather skeptical of the idea of someone actualyl being possessed by a demon. A scene like this frankly could have gone all wrong if the one reacting to the demonically possessed girl overacted at all, but Miller is deadly serious and realistic the entire time.
Miller continues to be effective and powerful in the pivotal final moments during the actual exorcism scenes. Miller is able to convey Damien's fear, and disbelief throughout the scene. Through each different attempt to get at him by the demon, Miller is able to honestly convey the brutality of the entire scene both emotionally and physically as the demon constantly wears him down. Miller through his realistic depiction is able to realize fully the horror of the scene.
Miller though realizes Damien courage and anger of the film. Miller is able to bring the power of the final scene extremely well showing Damien determination and strength perfectly. Miller gives a very powerful performance that is essential to the film, as Karras' transformation to uncertainty to determination is pivotal to the climax as well as his ability to bring realism to each of his scenes. Miller meets all of the challenges to his role, and succeeds completely with Damien.
For most of the film Miller's performance is an intensely quiet and subtle performance. His early scenes depict his problems dealing with the sickness and eventual death of his mother. It actually could have been very easy to have overplayed these moments but Miller is more effective by showing that the death of his mother troubles Karras greatly. The sadness and loss of faith in Karras is never portrayed in some huge outcry in his performance rather it is something deeper which Miller portrays in a very haunting way.
Karras though is forced to face his duty as a priest and his faith with the idea of the Exorcism and the possessed girl. Miller is terrific in his first scene with the demon as he at first is rather skeptical of the idea of someone actualyl being possessed by a demon. A scene like this frankly could have gone all wrong if the one reacting to the demonically possessed girl overacted at all, but Miller is deadly serious and realistic the entire time.
Miller continues to be effective and powerful in the pivotal final moments during the actual exorcism scenes. Miller is able to convey Damien's fear, and disbelief throughout the scene. Through each different attempt to get at him by the demon, Miller is able to honestly convey the brutality of the entire scene both emotionally and physically as the demon constantly wears him down. Miller through his realistic depiction is able to realize fully the horror of the scene.
Miller though realizes Damien courage and anger of the film. Miller is able to bring the power of the final scene extremely well showing Damien determination and strength perfectly. Miller gives a very powerful performance that is essential to the film, as Karras' transformation to uncertainty to determination is pivotal to the climax as well as his ability to bring realism to each of his scenes. Miller meets all of the challenges to his role, and succeeds completely with Damien.
Sunday, 30 October 2011
Best Supporting Actor 1973: Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger
Jack Gilford received his only Oscar nomination for portraying Phil Greene in Save the Tiger.
The simple fact about Save the Tiger is that it is an acting showcase for Jack Lemmon as the lead of Harry Stoner no one else. Lemmon's performance is the entire film, and because of that I am a little surprised that Gilford managed to get noticed by the academy as well. Gilford plays Phil Greene who is Harry Stoner's business partner who although is facing the same sort of a financial problems as Harry he is not facing as severe of psychological problems.
Gilford there acts as basically the sidekick to Harry extreme measures he takes to deal with their problems. Gilford is just fine in showing how they both have been partners for a longtime, and been in the same business for too long. He has the same sort of exhaustion as well as frustration as harry, although Gilford always shows that Phil is able to deal with it with far more easily than Harry.
Phil mostly just follows along Harry with every one of his plans the only thing he does is offer a less pessimistic view as well as act as the more conscience of the two. Gilford is good in realistically showing Phil's disbelief in the lengths Harry goes, but only showing enough disbelief to voice slight objections but never completely object to the idea either. After this though Gilford is not really given much to do, he is consistently fine but every scene he is in always belongs to Jack Lemmon not to him.
Gilford there acts as basically the sidekick to Harry extreme measures he takes to deal with their problems. Gilford is just fine in showing how they both have been partners for a longtime, and been in the same business for too long. He has the same sort of exhaustion as well as frustration as harry, although Gilford always shows that Phil is able to deal with it with far more easily than Harry.
Phil mostly just follows along Harry with every one of his plans the only thing he does is offer a less pessimistic view as well as act as the more conscience of the two. Gilford is good in realistically showing Phil's disbelief in the lengths Harry goes, but only showing enough disbelief to voice slight objections but never completely object to the idea either. After this though Gilford is not really given much to do, he is consistently fine but every scene he is in always belongs to Jack Lemmon not to him.
Best Supporting Actor 1973
Jason Miller in The Exorcist
Randy Quaid in The Last Detail
John Houseman in The Paper Chase
Vincent Gardenia in Bang the Drum Slowly
Jack Gilford in Save the Tiger
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)