Alternate Best Actor 1950: Alec Guinness in Last Holiday

Alec Guinness did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying George Bird in Last Holiday.

Last Holiday ill follows a man who suddenly discovers he's terminally ill, with only a few weeks left he takes up residence in an expensive hotel.

Alec Guinness is probably one of the actors with the greatest range, in terms of the characters and genres he could successfully perform. This as ability with humor and drama is notable in the ease he has in either material. This perhaps made him then ideal for the role here. This as its description makes one think this is going to be something more akin to Ikiru, however it has a lighter approach than that film, though not without dramatic intention. This as the film opens we meet Guinness's George Bird which Guinness portrays well with that sort of modesty he can as an middle class English any man. This with just a minor affability if a purposeful evasion of an overt charm that would not be befitting of his character. When we meet the character who learns of his diagnosis Guinness's reaction is remarkable in portraying both the sense of disbelief wrapped within a despair in his eyes. Guinness crafting a man really faltering in his existence. This though as Guinness does something essential here in portraying the man who really didn't pay anything of mind has this slight alteration as he speaks to a single task. This to enjoy his final days, however even this Guinness speaks with a hectic lack of certainty. This presenting the man state of modest despair and the whole idea of his holiday being some attempt to stave off his fate in a way. Nonetheless George goes about his path of living it up at a expensive hotel far beyond his means and by chance finds a wardrobe that makes him seemingly appropriate to the expensive lodgings.

The story then teeters on ensemble however Guinness is always the focal point of the man George, whom the other hotel guests become fascinated with through his quiet reserve initially. Again Guinness portraying the man just trying to experience what he can, and initially keeps that modesty of man not quite within his element. Quickly though everyone comes to take to George, or be suspicious of him in some way. In this though George's luck seems to turn around to his needs and George becomes the man of town mainly by existing. Guinness is terrific though in then showing through this sort of reaction that empowers George as people speak to him with a random respect, Guinness presents a man realizing his strength of personality. Guinness has these wonderful little moments where he provides a bit of nuance in these moments. This where Guinness portrays almost a fascination in the moments where things finally seem to be going well for him. This creating a slight detachment of a man who has nothing to lose and in turn acts in a way he never would've before. Guinness provides this specific type of confidence initially. This in the man observes for a moment before reaction and crafts a slight sense of bemusement within it. This in finding a man almost laughing at his changing fortunes just as his fortunes seem to be at their lowest point.

Guinness realizes with such ease this arc of George though as his next phase really is as he goes from confidence through detachment through a true confidence as the man doesn't only become the talk of the hotel, he really becomes the man of the hotel. Guinness is wonderful in presenting then the more overt confidence, this without that moment of bemusement or wonderment. This rather the instant reaction on his part or even the insistence of it. Guinness shows a man taking charge of both himself and his situation. This as George not only seems to help himself but randomly provides guidance to others as well. Guinness portraying with such the natural grace needed to honestly depict this arc in finding this sort of man about town from the meek man we initially met within the film. Although the film then proceeds to end on a darkly ironic note, perhaps too dark as I don't think the film quite has the depth to know what to do with what transpires in the final minutes of the film. Still though it does grant one final scene with Guinness, and it is a moving one. This in simply portraying the sense of appreciation of life in the man as he speaks his last words, just as his the weakness in his voice and haunted eyes also convey the state of the man being at his end. Now part of me I'll admit almost takes this performance for granted as of course Guinness pulls it off, but that is more than anything is a testament to his talent. This in realizing a potentially tricky arc here with just that typical Guinness ease within his performance, and creating another memorable turn from the great actor.

Alternate Best Actor 1950: John Garfield in The Breaking Point

John Garfield did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Harry Morgan in The Breaking Point.

The Breaking Point is another effective adaptation of To Have and Have Not, which follows a charter boat captain being forced into the black market after becoming financially strapped.

This adaptation being closer to the original novel as the nature of the man's situation is not during wartime changing the dynamics a bit of our lead character. John Garfield is an actor I'll admit to having struggled with a bit. Someone who I can sense the talent of more than I often see it, someone I've been waiting for his great performance. Well...this may be what I was waiting for. Garfield's style perhaps came too early, as he was a predecessor of the method actors that became the rage of the 50's. This style though perhaps less fitting to some of the parts found in the studio system. Here though we get a role that is ideal for that approach, and we also seem to have Garfield most within his element. This as we get a sense of the guy's financial difficulties just from the outset in Garfield's performance. This as he speaks with exasperation towards his wife about his woes as a fisherman and his inability seemingly to do anything else. Garfield's work has a quiet quality within the intensity here that is remarkable. This as he grants a sense of the man's years of a failure at this point as he speaks about it. Garfield granting it as much with a feeling of an acceptance of defeat in life more than anything. Although he carefully does create the stakes of likability just in the earnest warmth he brings in his interactions with his wife (Phyllis Thaxter), emphasizing just an honest love essential to where his character goes from this point.

We see though as Harry plies his trade and Garfield here is terrific in creating the sense of desperation in the immediacy of his action and suspicion. This with a sardonic quality he brings towards every word and a bit of suspicion towards his clients. Garfield finding a man whose suffered one defeat after another and is almost expecting just another one around the corner. This to the point of even interacting with the sultry costumer Leona (Patricia Neal), the idea of flirtation Garfield initially puts forth is almost an aggressive dismissive quality. This though is quite articulately performed though in the way Garfield so bluntly speaks Harry's words about how much he likes his wife, the intensity of that suggests so well the undercurrent of interest he does have in the woman. Another misfortune, by the way of a trip to Mexico where a costumer runs from the bill, leads Harry to take a job with a black market dealer, in order to just get out of Mexico. The job though, initially seeming an easy job of transporting illegal immigrants, quickly results in self-defense killing when the lead man tries to kill Harry. Garfield is great in these silent moments here as his eyes instantly capture this killer instinct of a man who formerly had combat experience. It with desperation though still in the moment of the fight, bringing a real visceral quality to the moment, something that typically rare in films from the time. Garfield though here finds the real darkness of the story by presenting within the struggle a real fight for one's life, and not just a typical hero stopping a bad guy.

When coming back from that job though Harry begins to be pulled between multiple forces in life. This including the two women in his life and again Garfield is excellent here in striking up two unique chemistries with Thaxter and Neal separately. This with Thaxter there is just a straight forward sense of affection and even vulnerability in Garfield's performance. This as he speaks of killing the man there's no sardonic edge, just a man revealing his personal sensitivity with an intimate poignancy. This against the moments with Neal where he carries that blunt shield of casual dismay though again within that, particularly in the way he looks at her, a palatable lust even if he barely falls upon it. Garfield's work though excels here leaning on that edge of the work and creates the sense of the way the two worlds seem to be pulling on him. This more overtly found though as his wife, and his partner (Juano Hernandez) pulling him away from more black market jobs, while his desperation and something else pulling him towards it. I think the later is important, and perhaps codes didn't allow the film to completely get it into it, however it is alluded to effectively within Garfield's performance. This being that same lust towards Neal, Garfield portrays a glint of thrill when negotiating and preparing for a job of taking some bank robbers after a robbery. Garfield's performance suggesting the lure of the darkness without being overt about it, yet creating a palatable sense of the urge towards the criminal world. This falling apart within the climax where the robbers truly hijack his boat and murder his partner in the process. Garfield is outstanding in this largely silent work from him, this in being absolutely captivating in building the tension of each moment of the sequence. This in building the man's discontent internally while bringing this incisiveness within his eyes of the man waiting to make his move against the men. This is the best work I've seen from Garfield. This as the role not only seems cued within his presence, but Garfield's work brings to life the distinct darkness within his portrait of a man more willing to commit to the criminal world than he admits. It is the sort of performance of an actor truly coming into his own, even if sadly it was one of his last.

Alternate Best Actor 1950: Vincent Price in The Baron of Arizona

Vincent Price did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying James Reavis in The Baron of Arizona.

The Baron of Arizona follows a con man, attempting through forgery, to own Arizona.

This film comes from Samuel Fuller, who I wouldn't call one of the greatest filmmakers of the period, but was one of the most interesting. This as Fuller tended to tackle characters and subjects outside of the mainstream. This often covering them in a detail or style that too was rarely the approach. Although this doesn't always mean his films were great, they are intriguing to revisit at least on that basis. One of the common features of Fuller's work was he typically didn't cast stars in his leading roles, this leading to leading turns by relative unknowns or by character actors. That is the case here in Vincent Price, who has a bit of a fascinating career where he traded in prestige and through exploitation during his career. While the latter is where he more commonly found leading roles in general, this could be argued as a matching of the pair. This being a prestigious leading role for Price, though fittingly as a less than prestigious character. This as the conman James Reavis who is given an usually close perspective by Fuller, though reduced a bit slightly by a lame framing device with a boring narrator discussing the strange case. What we do get though is Vincent Price in a role that is both in his most famous types, but also not quite that type. This as he plays a dastardly sort, but a different sort in that regard. This as he's not a randomly evil man, but rather a man with a very specific plant to try to swindle a whole nation really. This as we open upon his Reavis fashioning a family lineage, including a girl he intends to marry, who he is creating a false baroness out of for his scheme. Price in a way reducing his typical cinematic deviousness, as just a more cautioned operator, portraying a man who is almost tactically implementing his plan one step at a time.

We see him as he goes about him even sneaking into a monastery in order to try to adjust age old records. Price portraying the good servant as he carefully manipulates an old tomb, though honestly I'm waiting far more for when Price gets founded out and must make an initial mistake. This as we get then what is far more within Price's more delicious style of acting. This when he comes across some random villagers and Price is in his game, showing Reavis in him. This in initially a nice early moment where his expression marks an exasperation in Reavis's unusual way of livelihood. This until he switches towards the overt conman, and we get some nice Price wryness. This in portraying the sort of manipulation in the man as he gets the group of people what he needs to do through just what he says. Price saying it so well with his right sort of mix of temptation with charisma. Honestly I wish the film was more willing to allow his character to be overtly evil as that is when Price is at his best. This as we are mixed in with scenes of him finally marrying the younger woman he setup as the baroness to take over Arizona to con so many people. Although Price isn't bad in these scenes, these oddly have little purpose, even as the film wants some romantic notion of the relationship. A romantic notion we are sadly not granted really within the writing of the film. Price is fine in being more sincere in these moments, but honestly that's not what I'm here for with Price. Thankfully we do get more dastardly Price as the film goes on and eventually leads to a personal trial for Reavis. This is easily Price's best scene, and he's terrific in bringing such a palatable ego in his smug manner as Reavis attempts to boast about the invisible nature of forgery. Price bringing the right lack of shame to every word of a man who loves to state his fraud as a sign of pride. Sadly still the film sticks to humanizing Reavis which I don't actually think serves the story, even if still atypical for the time. Price's best scene of this nature does come as he is about to be hanged, mainly because Price doesn't really change the nature of the part within his performance. This even in his delivery of the words of Reavis through a ragged breath, it is still with a bit of snide disregard and that ego again of a proper con man. It seems Price wishes to really play an affable fiend, sadly the film doesn't quite go along making this a bit of a missed opportunity. Price is good with what he has, but too much of his work is potential of what could have been a greater character study of a true imp.

Alternate Best Actor 1950

And the Nominees Were Not:

Richard Widmark in Night and the City

Alec Guinness in Last Holiday

John Garfield in The Breaking Point

Vincent Price in The Baron of Arizona

Jean Marais in Orpheus

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Results

5. Marcel Iures in Hart's War - Iures gives a fine portrayal of the camp commandant, both the needed cold efficiency and some hints at humanity.

Best Scene: Giving the book.

4. Timothy Spall in All or Nothing - Spall gives a moving portrayal of a man in a constant state of depression that only sinks further.

Best Scene: Breakdown.

3. Brendan Fraser in The Quiet American - Fraser plays off his typical presence brilliantly by being both that and far more.

Best Scene: Final talk with Fowler.

2. Leandro Firmino in City of God - Firmino makes for a striking psychopathic murderer, though balances it with enough nuance in his realization of the character.

Best Scene: Benny's party. 

1. Christopher Plummer in Nicholas Nickleby - Good prediction Calvin. Plummer excels with his Dickens villain here, making the most of the miser, but being surprisingly heartbreaking as well.

Best Scene: Revelation.

Updated Overall 

Next: 1950 lead (throw in any supporting suggestions as well).

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Marcel Iures in Hart's War

Marcel Iures did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Colonel Werner Visser in Hart's War.

Hart's War in simplest terms is a World War II POW film about the murder trial for an African American officer accused of murder. It's a film that tries to cover a whole lot within this conceit, however the ambitious seem beyond the grasp of its director.

Marcel Iures plays the required role of the German camp commandant, and I'll say for the first half of the film this appears to be the fairly typical cold German portrayal. Iures does this in a way I will say is fine. This carrying himself with the calm resolute manner, having a callous glare towards men he is executing for having tried to escape and speaking with moderate venom towards his imprisoned counterpart Col. William McNamara (Bruce Willis). Standard I would say if entirely fine in presenting the opposition with the required type of efficiency, perhaps with a bit less charisma than say an Otto Preminger in Stalag 17, but good. Eventually Iures gets more to do when a series of events leads to one African American pilot being executed by the Germans via framing, and then the man likely responsible for that getting killed. This leading to the other African American office Lt. Scott (Terence Howard) being accused of murder. He is given a proper court martial, where our main character, the wet behind the ears somewhat cowardly law student Thomas Hart (Colin Farrell) is called upon to act as the defense. Although complications begin to occur, this including Colonel Visser offering Hart some help by giving him a court martial manual. This scene is Iures's focal point scene where he reduces his typical manner to portray the moment as though Visser is just one making speaking to another. There is still a certain distance in his overall tone, but Iures does well to accentuate a man of speaking genuine interests in a more casual, as well as more humane manner. It's a good scene for Iures as he effectively differentiates the man from the soldier. This only brief though as we see him reacting to Hart's new abilities to mess with McNamara's plans for the court martial. There though Iures is good though as the manipulator with the smiles of bemusement of seeing his manipulations working. Iures work here in general finds a degree of nuance to present as well an interest in the proceedings that go beyond his manipulations, again alluding to the degree of humanity in the scene with Farrell. Much like the film I don't think it really builds towards something substantial, and is more on the border of something greater. I don't think Iures is able to quite find that greatness within his own work, but it is good performance. He goes beyond a stock villain to find some complexity within the role, even if I wish there was perhaps a bit more.

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Christopher Plummer in Nicholas Nickleby

Christopher Plummer did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Ralph Nickleby in Nicholas Nickleby.

Nicholas Nickleby is a fine, if just that, Charles Dickens adaptation about the titular young man coming to age while having to deal with different ills of Victorian England.

I have to say after watching The Man Who Invented Christmas, about Dickens writing a Christmas Carol it got me thinking what a fully fledged portrayal of Scrooge would be like. This as while Plummer played Scrooge in that film, it was a purposefully arch type portrayal, more for the generalized idea of the character, than really getting into the meat of who he was sort of beyond the page, again I believe this was entirely intentional. Thankfully it appears this thought was already realized in this film. Now, Plummer doesn't play Dickens's most famous miser in Ebenezer Scrooge here, but the character of Ralph Nickleby is definitely a classic miser in his own right. Now, as to be expected, Plummer's demeanor and voice couldn't seem a better fit for the world of Dickens already from the outset. He not only fits into the clothes like he was born in them, but Plummer's voice already is a perfect fit for the Victorian style vernacular. Unsurprisingly Plummer makes a striking impression from his first scene where the Nickleby family seeks help from their uncle after the death of their father. Plummer's performance delivering on the wanted sort of cold precision of manner as he speaks every word with a blithe disregard for nearly any sentiment for his father. Plummer presenting a general indifference towards his family's needs and more so the death of his brother. Ralph providing only basic leads for his niece and nephew, the titular Nick (Charlie Hunnam), for financial support. Plummer finds a wonderful balance in this moment though in that there is the slightest hint of warmth in recommending work for his niece, however for his nephew it is with a diabolical grin of a man knowing far more of the appointment than he is letting on.

This is quickly found by Nicholas as his job is at a horrible boarding school. His slight hint of warmth is even found questionable as Ralph subjects his niece to a creepathon in a dinner with a group of older men. Plummer showing that Ralph is perhaps the greatest creep of all as he presents Ralph as man unable to exactly interact with his niece that isn't somewhat questionable. Plummer plays this particularly well in he presents it as almost the man isn't quite aware of his own perhaps lecherous desire. This as he speaks with a calm support and apology to her, yet his eyes speak as though he is living within some sick fantasy. Plummer making for quite the horrible villain, though in the best ways, and quite frankly makes Ebenezer Scrooge look like a nice chap, even before he is reformed. Plummer though excels here in finding variety within the blunt villainy of the character. This as a moment where one of his clients comes to Ralph over his horrible treatment of niece and nephew. Plummer starting the scene with the smug assurance of a man whose always got what he's wanted and everything seemingly has gone his way. He's effortless though in the switch, and properly horrible still in the sheer disbelief when he sense the man has any distaste for his cruel actions. Plummer's face of being taken aback is properly cathartic, but also so effectively shows the nature of the man's state as he is so shaken by any disruption of his financial control. Plummer is just a delicious dastardly fiend here, in just with such confidence portraying the man's cruel nature with such ease. This again though with a delightful nuance for the material, for example finding humor in reacting to the rather grotesque bad boarding school master with a combination of withdrawn disgust hidden by a phony courteousness for a man he wishes to use against his nephew, this in contrast to another moment of so specifically altering his voice to the coldest tone when speaking of his most hated nephew. Plummer is fantastic here in making the most out of any given scene by never taking a single path in revealing Ralph's villainy.

Now as much as Plummer makes for a great miser villain here, I probably wouldn't even be mentioning this performance it were not for the climax of the film. The climax of this film following Nicholas as he uncovers some secret for a final confrontation with Ralph, where all is revealed in a classic novel serial style fashion. This also where he gets sort of his Scrooge moment, this in facing his past, though not through supernatural means but rather just Nicholas revealing an important thing about Ralph's past. Now before even this we do have a certain descent as everything is going against Ralph largely due to his questionable ways. This within just a great moment where we see Ralph alone reacting to his change in fortunes. It is satisfying in the sense of the man losing that smug confidence, but there is something more within his work. Again Plummer's performance grants something more intimate within the miser a real pathos even in the moment of the man facing ruin, a humanity within the pathetic reaction. Although he doesn't make you sympathize with Ralph in the moment, he so artfully elevates the potential archetype through the degree of depth of his portrayal. That is but a warm up for the revelation scene. The revelation being initially of a secret marriage of Ralph's that resulted in a son who was said to be sickly. Plummer's performance is outstanding in this scene, and really earned largely through even that greater nuance within his portrayal of the generally evil character we found in the rest of the film. This as even mentioning the marriage it is with a quiet recognized regret on Plummer's brow, however a greater somberness is revealed as he notes the death of his son as broken hearted father. A broken heart though long ago. As the story goes on though it is revealed the boy had lived for some time, and it is revealed to have been in fact a boy at the bad boarding school who had become best friends with Nicholas. Plummer's face filling with a dread as he grants such palatable emotion in the moment of Ralph recognizing that he had earlier sabotaged his own son to try to get to get Nicholas, having not known he was his son, though in turn perhaps helping to the early demise of the boy. Although this is not the redemption of Scrooge, Plummer is heartbreaking in that sense in revealing the moment of revelation that does create a change in the man. This in revealing the heart of the man only within sorrow. Plummer's work in this scene is astonishing at times as his expression not only shows the sense of regret but also in his eyes, the sense of man whose long held reality is shattering through these words. This with even though a moment of calling back to the potential love for his wife, and son, that is so beautifully performed as Plummer looks upon the boy's bed with a sense of love wrapped within despair. Plummer realizing his own Scrooge like change, though this time not for a man to renew his life but rather gives into his death. Although overall I'd call the film overall as just fine, Plummer goes above and beyond in his performance here. This by creating both a proper Dicksonian villain but also a genuinely tragic fool.