Alternate Best Actor 1959: Jean-Pierre Léaud in The 400 Blows

Jean-Pierre Léaud did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Antoine Doinel in The 400 Blows.

The 400 Blows is an interesting film depicting the life of a troubled young boy.

Jean-Pierre Léaud plays that young boy who leads the film and it is essential that Léaud passes the child actor test for a realistic film which is to be believable as a kid actually. Well Léaud certainly meets this requirement for Antoine. Although he leads the film though this is not a precocious or endearing young child that we are going to follow. In fact Léaud gives a fairly uncharismatic performance, but don't take that as a criticism. Léaud does not make Antoine an endearing little boy who we're going to enjoy having adventures with. Although really some of the stuff he does is often construed as such in other more lighthearted films that is not the case here. Léaud instead portrays him as the rather unpleasant child that he is. Léaud captures that almost perpetual pout of such a child who always seems slightly at unease even though there is nothing specifically causing him pain. After all he has a family who technically provide for him, he goes to a nice enough school, he even has friends, but nevertheless Léaud portrays the boy as never really being happy.

Léaud's work exudes that sort of indifference of Antoine's behavior in his life. When he behaves poorly in school there is nothing particularly funny about anything he does. He's not doing it for enjoyment he's just doing it. The same goes for the lies that Antoine constantly tells. Léaud never depicts any shrewdness in this, there is not a hint of mischief in it either. Instead he portrays it as a bit of blank action of sorts that again is something that Antoine just does. Even when he lies to his teacher by saying his mother has died in order to explain his absence there is something quite lifeless about the way Léaud delivers in these scenes. That's even the case when he steals, there's Again I am not criticizing his performance at all when I say this, this works instead to accurately show the behavior as really meaningless behavior. Well meaningless in what he's trying to get out of it in the short term, but not meaningless altogether. Léaud does well to allude to the need in Antoine for attention driving this though in a subconscious fashion.

This seems to have developed from Antoine's relationship with his mother, who was unwed when he was born, and did not raise him for many years of his childhood. The problems are compounded through her most recent behavior to him which is quite random as she will become quite cruel one minute than excessively encouraging the next in order to comfort him. Léaud is good in these scenes between Antoine and his mother as he expresses the awkwardness of their interactions. They never quite seem to get along, and even in their moments of warmth there is still something problematic about it. Léaud never depicts a full contentment with Antoine towards his mother as though he's unable to fully understand her own problematic behavior as well as can't quite reconcile her past abandonment of him. They is always that barrier that also extends to his step-father, unfortunately because he is his step father, because Léaud suggests a little more comfort with him as there are not those lingering feelings of betrayal when the two speak with one another.

Although his behavior often is pointless and in general there is a cold demeanor about Antoine, Léaud never makes him emotionless. Importantly because of suggesting where this coldness comes from, but also he shows a bit of difference in himself when he is with his peers. In these moments there is more of an investment he shows, and when he is directly embarrassed in front of them Léaud shows a greater vulnerability in the boy. The friendship he has with another boy clearly matters to him, and there is a very affecting scene for Léaud late in the film when he is pained to see that his friend is not allowed to see him. There is another more open sequence, that might be where the majority of his lines in the film comes from, where he goes to see a psychologist who asks him various things about his life. Léaud uses the scene well to present more overtly though troubled feelings that compel his behavior, but also that even behind his stare that he's just a boy through his shyness when asked if he's ever slept with woman. This is a good performance by Léaud as he simply accurately depicts this sort of child, not as a psychopath, or an elvish scamp, but just as a deeply troubled boy.

Alternate Best Actor 1959: Cary Grant in North By Northwest

Cary Grant did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Roger Thornhill in North By Northwest.

North By Northwest is a very entertaining thriller, although I think that early long exposition that puts us ahead of Grant's character is totally unnecessary, about a man mistaken for a spy.

Cary Grant made four films with Alfred Hitchcock. The first two made in the forties were quite atypical Grant with Suspicion where he played a husband possibly planning a murder, and Notorious where he played a very cold government agent. They would re-team again a decade later with To Catch a Thief which likely is more fitting to Grant's usual style, but that film was really just a bit too breezy for its own good with the thriller elements being particular lax in nature. North By Northwest is the only time where Grant collaborated with Hitchcock as one of his wrong man on the run characters. Although he was wrong man of sorts in To Catch a Thief as a thief who just happened to be the thief the police were looking for, he certainly did not seem very worried about getting caught at any point. North By Northwest is a much stronger thriller, and in turn Grant gets a far more interesting role to play in the film. As most wrong man performances though Grant begins the film as a fairly innocuous character, while innocuous in that his biggest concern is to make sure he gets a message to his mother.

Cary Grant is completely in his element in these early scenes as he has such a delicate feather almost feather touch manner towards the proceedings. Grant is his extremely charming self as he is in such a lighter role, although this might be Grant as his most charming. He really does just brighten up the screen with his presence this time, as he makes Thornhill an immensely likable character in just a couple of these early scenes, and by couple I mean two, that by time he is kidnapped, due to a mistake by his captors, we are fully invested into his character's survival. Thornhill realizes he's become the wrong man by being greeted by a group of strange men including a well spoken yet sinister fellow (James Mason). Grant is simply superb in this role as he simply thrives so well in the material he is given. Grant not only fully shows how any average man would react to being confronted with such strange accusations, that being complete confusion, but he also injects so much humor into the proceedings. This scene might not even necessarily have been that funny, but the way Grant plays through it is remarkable. He never takes away the seriousness of the situation yet is marvelous in the way he brings out the joke that's being played on poor Roger.

Of course in perhaps the film's most overt comic scene though where Thornhill attempts to make out where he is exactly after ending up in a police station after narrowly surviving assassination via drunkenness. Well Grant's good at doing a Thomas Mitchell sort of drunk, and is quite enjoyable throughout the sequence. I've particularly loved his surprise while being in a certain daze as he attempts to drive the vehicle that was meant to ensure his demise. Due to not being able to find any exact proof his captors existence this leads Thornhill on a strange chase to try to find out who this person is that those men were so sure he was. This does lead Thornhill any where particularly helpful since one of these places ends up making him another wrong man in a murder investigation. The simple fact of it is Grant is supremely watchable and compelling just to view go through the process of the thriller. The screen could not be more his friend here, because one would be hard pressed to name a performer more at ease than Grant is here, while still keeping one invested in the story. Grant does not slack in this regard in the least and is excellent in the way he reflects every little twist that Thornhill faces in his expression. He's captivating here and flows so well with the style of the film.

Thornhill only gets further into the plot when he runs into a woman Eve Kendall (Eva Marie Saint) on a train who seems to have plenty of secrets of her own since she is perhaps just a little too willing to help Thornhill who by this point is a suspected murderer. Grant's flawlessness in the role only seems to continue in these scenes as maneuvers in these scenes quite adeptly. Although a lot of their talk is Bogie/Bacall sort of innuendos, Grant brings a little more to it then that as he shows the way that Thornhill is swept up a bit by her let's say eagerness. Of course after she leads him into a trap Grant is terrific in the way he projects the coldness and suspicion in Thornhill as starts to figure out she is perhaps another trick being played on him. This brings us to one of my favorite scenes of the film where Thornhill has another face off with Mason's character. Now it needs to be said that Grant has such a wonderful understanding of the tone of the film, and while quite simply the style of the dialogue. There is not a wasted line that Grant delivers that he does not bring something to. This includes Thornhill unorthodox method of getting away from potential assassins by acting as the lout at an auction, and Grant is absolutely hilarious in his realization of Thornhill's plan.

This eventually causes Thornhill to leave his position as the wrong of the film and forces him to become a bit of James Bond figure. It's easy to see why he was approached for the role of James Bond in Dr. No as he certainly shows his chops for that role in the film, particularly in the film's climax. Well Grant already has the charm in spades, and can deliver a line for all its worth. Grant here shows even more than that though in the way he does bring weight to the action sequences, which in a way shows the strength of this performance. You always care about what happens in the action sequences because you care about poor Roger Thornhill throughout, and Grant never depicts Thornhill as some sort of action hero in any of these scenes. In fact he presents him to have plenty of fear of death during these scenes, and helps heighten the tension of each. It actually seems a little odd that it took Hitchcock so long to fully utilize Grant's abilities, but at he finally managed to do so here. Grant could not be a more perfect fit for the role. He is just on top of things throughout the film as he ensures to deliver just about as much entertainment as the film has to offer through his work. Grant here shows that one does not need to bare his soul to give a great performance, since this is a great performance by Cary Grant.

Alternate Best Actor 1959: Alec Guinness in The Scapegoat

Alec Guinness did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying John Barratt and Jacques De Gué in the Scapegoat.

The Scapegoat has an intriguing concept, although it never quite takes off as it should as a film, about a man who is given the life of his double, he just chances upon, for an unknown reason.

If someone is coming in expecting this to be Alec Guinness's Dead Ringers they will be disappointed. Guinness does play a dual role, but the two men are not twins. The character of Jacques De Gué is also only in a few scenes, and the film does not strive to make much of a dynamic between the two. Yet the scenes of their interactions are perhaps the most interesting in the film thanks to Guinness. Guinness certainly can handle a variety of voices, as well as transform himself considerably in a role, but he does not do this in his portrayal of the two men. This is not to say that he does not realize each man in their own unique fashion. Our main character John Barratt Guinness realizes as a modest enough proper British Gentlemen. He finds him well simply as a man without presumptions, but also without much of anything in terms of his outlook on life keeping him quite meek in his disposition. As Jacques De Gué he does not acquire a French accent, with good reason since, save one, all the other French characters in the film are played by British actors.

Since part of the story is for John to replace Jacques without much trouble, it makes sense for the man not to differ too greatly. Guinness though does shows Jacques to be a man who has lived much more of a "fuller" life in his more outgoing manner, although like John Guinness conveys a certain exasperation within this as though he's also quite tired of his own particular existence. Guinness is terrific though in the way he naturally depicts a different body language in Jacques which are broader, and freer for a man who seems more use to an outgoing life. In turn Guinness depicts John's own as a much more constricted. The most remarkable thing about the twin depiction though is his slight alteration in voice. Guinness does not use a different accent in either role, but there is an alteration in the way he speaks words with slight faster and smoother pace as Jacques, along with differing use of emphases. I would not have minded more the two together because Guinness's work is quite fascinating since he able to realize these differences while still making it convincing that the ruse would not be questioned.

The majority of the film though is not on the two of them together but rather John being placed in to Jacques's life. Guinness portrays John's earliest reactions as particularly straight and realistic as he's just taken aback by the situation, and refuses to recognize that he has been placed in this ruse. Everyone around him refusing to believe that he is anyone but Jacques begins to wear him down. Guinness does not depict this as though John is convinced to participate in the ruse simply because no one will accept his actual story, but rather Guinness conveys very nicely the moments where he begins to interact with the film, especially Jacques, daughter an understated happiness that begins to develop in John. Guinness strikes up an interesting dynamic because he does not play it as though John is exactly purposefully perpetuating the ruse in terms of his own performance. He still keeps John as his modest self, which is quite different form Jacques, but Guinness makes the ruse believable as the sort of modesty that Guinness depicts could easily be misinterpreted as either a sort of joke, or attempt at being apologetic from a more flamboyant individual. 

The succeeding scenes essentially follow John as he goes from one aspect of Jacques life to another, and frankly this calls upon the genuine class it takes to spell out Alec Guinness's name. Guinness presents John to be as dignified of a figure as possible as he goes about seeing various members of Jacques's family who all have something at least slightly strange about them. Guinness plays this scenes out with a quiet reserve though exudes a certain understanding and warmth as he interacts with each with a slight detachment though with a complete respect for their individual needs. There is a certain sweetness that Guinness is able to develop with almost all the members of Jacques's immediate family, as well as even his mistress. The relationship Guinness develops between John and Jacques's daughter is particularly charming, and Guinness is excellent in showing the way that the relationships gradually develop in creating a stronger familiarity between the stranger and the family. The conceit of the story is that John helps almost all of them through their problems, the writing does not do enough to provide reason for this, but Guinness's performance manages to give at least some sense to these developments.

Eventually something drastic happens, where the purpose of Jacques's ruse comes to light, and Guinness is quite effective in portraying just how much the people in the family have come to mean to John. This leads to a final confrontation between Jacques and John. It's a fantastic scene for Guinness as he fully reveals the cruelty to Jacques, only suggested by the state of his family, bringing such venomous pride in his words as he describes what he has done as well as states his specific demand to have his life back. In turn Guinness brings the right sort of poignancy as he portrays the refined yet palatable passion in John as it becomes clear that he has no intention to give up the life, a life Jacques only gave up in order to commit a despicable act. This confrontation is indeed a high point to go out for the film because he mostly focuses on Guinness's assured performance as both men. The weaknesses of the film reveal themselves when the actual final scenes suddenly suggest as though John's relationship Jacques was suppose to be particularly meaningful, which it was not, and the film adds to far less than it should. Guinness's own work can never be faulted though as he elevates what good there is in the film, and gives a compelling portrayal of both characters. 

Alternate Best Actor 1959: Anthony Franciosa in Career

Anthony Franciosa did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning a Golden Globe, for portraying Sam Lawson in Career.

Career is a decent enough film about an aspiring actors continued attempts to break out on the New York stage.

Anthony Franciosa is not an actor I have been fond of, in fact I found every other performance of his that I have seen pretty atrocious including his Oscar nominated performance. Well this perhaps brought him close to another nomination since he did indeed win the Golden Globe for best actor in a drama, which usually translates to an Oscar nomination. That was not the case for Franciosa. Well this seems like a good thing right? After all this part seems ready to come off poorly since one thing they keep mentioning is that above all else is that his character Sam Lawson is a talented actor. Well I have to admit Franciosa's not bad at all here. I don't know what happened maybe Dean Martin playing it so low-key made him relax a bit, or perhaps Shirley MacLaine chomping down the scenery whole sale made him decide to play it down, because Franciosa plays the part in a pretty calm fashion here. He almost comes across as a different actor as he does not just fall down upon his old tricks as he usually did.

Franciosa is actually likable, that's right likable, as he portrays the early scenes of Sam trying to make it in New York with his wife, despite success seeming so difficult to obtain. Franciosa manages to convey his particular passion quiet effectively actually and is able to realize his dream of the stage in a way that does not at all problematic. It would be very easy for such a character to seem far too self-indulgent but Franciosa manages to bring an honesty in this passion that makes you understand why Sam has this dream. Things do not get better though as he is unable to find steady work and his wife Barbara (Joan Blackman) begins to have some particular strong second thoughts about the venture. Now in these scenes something so bizarre happens, it's almost impossible to comprehend the strangeness of it all, in the scenes where Blackman gets kinda melodramatic and over the top Franciosa stay understated in his performance. Inconceivable. Franciosa goes past that though and is even quite good in portraying just that powerful yet desperate desire in Sam to achieve his dream no matter what, that you do feel sorry for Sam when she leaves him.

The oddity continues in his scenes with his agent Shirley (Carolyn Jones) who is trying her best to find him parts, but nothing ever seems to quite work out. Franciosa and Jones are just really charming together actually, and it enjoyable to see their little reactions with each other as they stay casual as Sam faces one defeat after another. There is such a nice warmth about the two's interactions that is not a traditional sort of romantic chemistry but Franciosa and Jones really make you see the unsaid love the two have for each other. Their relationship being the always the bright spot within the film and both actors earn this wonderfully well. The other main relationship is with another wannabe Maury (Martin), who Sam always comes across throughout his career. Although that start out together in a chummy enough fashion, when Maury finds any success he quickly forgets about Sam. Franciosa does a lot in his moments with Martin by portraying so well the intensity that grows in Sam through the frustrations he faces while dealing with the amoral Maury.

When later on Sam becomes somewhat amoral himself for a brief period, by stealing Maury's girl (MacLaine), Franciosa earns the darker side of Sam as he seems to hate everything, by building it up in the previous scenes. At the same time Franciosa effectively conveys the discomfort in Sam in being such a cruel man, and falling back into a better man feels just as natural. Before that happens though there is one last challenge to be performed. That's when Maury does one betrayal too many, and at a particular painful time leaving Sam to attack Maury while threatening to kill him. Time for good old Franciosa right? Wrong. First of all its though only scene this extreme in the performance, and deserved of the situation. Secondly though Franciosa delivers in making feel like the genuine hate from Sam towards a man who has pushed him too far. This performance is quite frightening to tell you the truth its breaking my whole reality, where things seemed so simple and Franciosa was only capable of a terrible performance. Saying this is the best I've seen from him is not good enough. He's actually good here, and not only that I found him endearing. That's right the film had classic feel good moment at the end thanks to how much I found myself caring for Sam as a character thanks to Franciosa.

Alternate Best Actor 1959: Tatsuya Nakadai in The Human Condition I: No Greater Love

Tatsuya Nakadai did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Kaji in The Human Condition I: No Greater Love.

The Human Condition is a trilogy of films depicting one man's journey during World War II. The first film details the man's attempt to avoid being drafted into the military by taking a job supervising a forced labor camp.

Tatsuya Nakadai perhaps became best known for his more devious turns opposite of Toshiro Mifune or his eventual leading turns as Samurai lords in Ran and Kagemusha, but here he plays technically speaking an average man of the 1940's. As the film opens Nakadai depicts Kaji as a pretty normal man who is fearful of being called into military service. Nakadai in the early scenes properly reflects this certain fear that keeps him also from even making a commitment to his fiancee Michiko. Nakadai portrays this in a particularly honest way as there is a certain cowardice in his behavior, even if there is belief behind it somewhere, the way Nakadai at the beginning portrays Kaji simply believes himself simply to not be suited for war. There is a sentiment of pacifism within this, but it is not the overpowering trait. This is evidenced further when Kaji, instead of taking a life sentence in prison for refusing to fight, is able to get military exemption through a promotion in his work. Nakadai does well not to hide the very simple joy of losing his fear of war as he goes about his new assignment, and seems to intent on living again as he marries Michiko since he no longer fears for his life.

The new promotion though is not a easy position by any means though as he is sent to a mining camp in Manchuria, where he will act as a supervisor for the Chinese who are put into forced labor. Nakadai in those earlier scenes set up Kaji well as basically the activist with only a personal cause, and an activist who simply has never faced a personal trial for these beliefs. He's been able to go along with life just fine without having to confront himself, and Nakadai's performance fittingly realizes this mentality in Kaji as he is first welcomed into the camp by the other supervisors. Nakadai brings the enthusiasm of a reformer, but also the naivety of someone who has never reformed anything when he first attempts to start to speak his mind with his new ideas. Nakadai presents Kaji as being appropriately taken aback when he is informed of some of what his duties will actually be such as organizing the removal of excrement, as well as learning that they expect him to bring prostitute to the camps for the workers. Nakadai naturally strips Kaji of this early enthusiasm as he realizes things are not nearly as simple as he imagined they would be in his head, but this is only the first indication that the job is not quite as he might have expected.

The film offers an intriguing perspective as films set in labor camps are more likely to be from the view of the prisoners, but here we are given instead the view of one of the men running it. Nakadai's fairly unassuming approach works wonders in allowing us to follow very closely along with Kaji as he attempts to make his way as a warden of sorts in the camp. Nakadai starts off by showing Kaji struggling a bit just to get his mind wrapped around the procedures, as well as being particularly  disgusted by some of the mistreatment he does see. Nakadai brings the needed passion of a man trying to make things somewhat better for these men, and this seems to work. His job becomes more difficult though when he must deal with a new set of workers who are full blown prisoners who must not escape in addition to only working for food. Nakadai is terrific in reflecting the extreme inhumanity in the prisoners arrival where they were starved, and forced into a burning train. Nakadai's exudes well Kaji considerable sympathy for their plight, although it is soon the case that Kaji must still supervise their camp, which is proven to be quite the difficult endeavor from the start.

Once the prisoners show the film adjusts its focus somewhat to include some individual stories in and around Kaji though everything always comes back to him. The strength of Nakadai's work here is the way he portrays a very unique transformation of his character. In the early stages Nakadai presents Kaji as the friendly face who is clearly willing to fight for their proper treatment no matter what. Of course even in this there are tasks he is not proud of and Nakadai is very good in showing the awkwardness in Kaji as he brokers the deal with a group of prostitutes to come to his camp. Worse problems arise when a worker is killed and Nakadai brings the power to Kaji's outrage, but he also brings the eventual frustration though resignation when he finds all the authority figures want to sweep it under the rug or they'll sweep him under it. This leaves an unhappy prisoner population and many of them soon begin to plan to escape. Nakadai realizes in a very genuine fashion how the escape attempts seem to change Kaji as it simply becomes harder to be a pure humanitarian. The difficulty of the job mounts and Nakadai manages to portray how some viciousness can come out of a good man due to a terrible system.

The interesting thing is that the prisoners have good reason to escape yet Nakadai manages to create a strong sympathy in Kaji's difficulty to control them, and gives sense to his actions even when he treats them roughly. Nakadai does not show this transformation as Kaji becoming evil, rather him starting allow himself to be overwhelmed by an evil machine he's a cog of. Nakadai never loses the humanity but shows how it some of it is forced out of him through the horrible requirements of the job. Kaji still tries to fight for them, but Nakadai realizes this with much less optimism, along with palatable emotional turmoil as he only ever comes to barriers in trying to do the right thing. A choice is forced upon him though when the powers that be decide that a groups of the prisoners will be executed. Nakadai is outstanding in the scenes before the executions as he gives the final burst of Kaji's old self as he tries fruitlessly to get a reprieve, and shows how this almost seems to burn him out to a true complacency when no one seems to care. This leads to the executions which he is forced to watch, and Nakadai is heartbreaking as he expresses the despair in Kaji as the men are killed with a sword. Within the despair though that old passion builds and Nakadai gives the needed power to when Kaji finally stands up to the soldiers. Nakadai's particularly poignant as the fear of reprisal is in his eyes, yet he expresses the conviction of to do what is humane is always evident. Now if this were not a trilogy the film likely would end soon after this scene. It continues though to set up the next film with Kaji being tortured before losing his exemption from the war, and being sent off. Nakadai is exceptional in these scenes as well, but what is most remarkable is Nakadai brilliantly realizing this unique arc for Kaji's character from a unearned goodness, to slowly a man complacent with evil, to finally a man who's learned what it means to be and has become a decent man. Although this is just part one of Kaji's story, Nakadai's performance feels complete. 

Alternate Best Actor 1959: Dean Stockwell in Compulsion

Dean Stockwell did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning Cannes, for portraying Judd Steiner in Compulsion.

Compulsion is a somewhat compelling film, although certainly brought down by a romantic sub-plot featuring the two worst performances in the film, that tells a fictionalized version of Leopold and Loeb's murder trial.

Leopold and Loeb had previously been fictionalized in film through the 1948 Alfred Hitchcock film Rope. That film took place all in one room and attempted to tell the story of the two men through the setup of a thriller. Compulsion is far more reaching in its version covering the story closer to the actual facts as well as going into the aftermath of the murder, rather than merely depicting the time between the murder and then where they were caught. Both films start in a very similair fashion in that both begin when the murder has just occurred, although in this version instead of killing a classmate they murder a child which was factual to the real case. In both though it focuses in from there onto the relationship of the two young men who decided to commit the murder because they believed themselves superior, and decided that they were basically entitled to a murder since they were supermen who were above the law. This leads them to commit the murder which they believe will be a perfect one which they will get away with since they've worked out every detail it seems.

Dean Stockwell is an actor with a rather odd career to recount as he started as a cutesy child actor in many high profile films, then successfully bridges over the gap into adulthood with a few prominent leading turns. Stockwell's brief stint as a leading man in high profile films seemed strange but likely it was caused by him apparently getting into the hippie counterculture, since after his gap in his filmography his leading turns came in the form of a rather different sort of films although he certainly found success as a character actor. Repulsion stands as one of his most notable leading performances from that brief period as he plays one of the young murderers. Stockwell plays Judd, much like with Farley Granger in Rope, Judd is the submissive of the two men. Farley Granger played this as meekly as possible, but Stockwell is far more interesting in his approach as seen in the opening sequence. Stockwell does not depict it as an overarching quality rather something more specifically attached to their crime. When Judd states his acceptance of this position Stockwell conveys why as he seems to suggest a certain almost sexual thrill in Judd over the prospect.

The other young man is Artie Strauss played by Bradford Dillman takes a similair approach, although I would done in a far more effective manner, as John Dall in Rope as they both present their man is particularly remorseless, but really he'd have to be if he goes about taunting fate by even trying to help in the investigation personally. With Judd is a bit less exact in his behavior. In more official settings such as in the classroom, or in a discussion with other students Stockwell portrays Judd in being very close to Artie in terms of personality. Stockwell is quite good in expressing the sheer pompousness of this pervasive attitude in Judd as he reveals his philosophy about the right of a superior man. Stockwell does not hide just how unlikable the whole idea is, or how unlikable Judd is when he is talking about, but what he does show is the strong conviction in Judd when he speaks these words. There is an affirmative belief and absolute conviction that Stockwell gives every word, the sort of conviction that would be needed to take the philosophy to the next step which would be to actually commit murder to put the philosophy into action.

Judd though does not bring this same conviction though when he is outside an academic setting, and in the real world. Stockwell does well to provide an awkwardness to Judd as he basically has to be a normal person trying to interact with others without his philosophy to hide behind, or with Artie to interact with. There is far less certainty to the man, and Stockwell effectively conveys the weaknesses within him. When a situation causes Judd to reveal some violent and psychotic tendencies Stockwell does not portray it as coming from the super man of his philosophy, but rather just a deranged and pathetic individual. Judd's believability as a "superman" becomes even more into question once it is discovered that they left a pair of glasses at the scene of the crime. Stockwell is terrific as he reveals far less than a master criminal in the scenes where the two men begin to hear about the evidence that suggests they'll likely become suspects sooner rather than later. Stockwell delivers in finding the sort of visceral gut reactions in these scenes fitting for someone whose going back through his mind, and realized they've made a terrible mistake.

Their "perfect" murder comes crashing down in front of their faces as Judd is soon brought in for questioning due to his glasses. Stockwell is great in these scenes because he shows Judd attempting to be the superior being again as he goes face to face with the district attorney. Now outside of just stating his own personal theories Stockwell brings a considerable desperation in the act as it is obvious Judd is not nearly as confident about the matter as he claims to be. This makes it wholly naturally when he quickly breaks down into an emotional mess when it is revealed they know it is his glasses, and later when Artie quickly confesses to the crime after they are both formally brought in. The two fall apart to reveal far less than they every pretended to be and Stockwell is excellent in realizing Judd as the mess he truly is. Stockwell and Dillman take a back seat in the last act of the film once they two men are brought to trial as the film more closely follows on the actions of their defense attorney named Jonathan Wilk clearly based on Clarence Darrow and played by Orson Welles. Stockwell still delivers in the few moments that he has but his impact is diminished. This really does not matter much though as the proceeding scenes allowed him create compelling portrayal of the rather unique derangement of this young man.

Alternate Best Actor 1959

And the Nominees Were Not:

Tatsuya Nakadai in The Human Condition I: No Greater Love

Jean-Pierre Léaud in The 400 Blows

Cary Grant in North By Northwest

Alec Guinness in The Scapegoat

Dean Stockwell in Compulsion

And for Some Reason:

Anthony Franciosa in Career