In Any Other Year They Would Have Won...

Every awards cycle, I hear a lot of clichés.  Some of them are from nominees, who basically have to say them  (“it was a great year for women” has been uttered in every Best Actress race I can remember, including in years when it wasn’t a great year for women).  However, one trotted out with utter frequency by pundits is the “in any other year they would have won.”

I literally hear it every single year, and I think it’s about time we put it to rest-in any other year someone would have won is just not a viable statement, because every year features strong competitors and strong narratives.  If you aren’t taking on Helen Mirren in The Queen, it’s Sandra Bullock in The Blind Side or Reese Witherspoon in Walk the Line.

In an effort to diffuse this cliché, I figured that I would take a stab at the last five years’ worth of races and compete the “second places” against each other and who I think Oscar would have gone with for the win.  It’s not a perfect system for a variety of factors we’ll get into, but it’s darn fun and great fodder for comments (hint, hint), so I figured I’d give it a shot.  Agree or argue in the comments (and just to note, I’m going with assumed strength with Oscar, and not my personal picks, which you can peruse if you click here):

Best Supporting Actor

The Second Places: Because of the relative dominance one actor generally assumes in this race, it’s actually quite difficult to figure out the second places.  For 2009, I’m going with Harrelson over Tucci, mainly because his film had more momentum and Woody in general had more momentum at the time (and now).  In 2010, Geoffrey Rush’s BAFTA Award pushes him into silver.  Ditto Barkhad Abdi in 2013.  Tommy Lee Jones won the SAG Award in 2012, so I’ll give this to him.  And finally, we have the gargantuan Christopher Plummer in 2011-I honestly have trouble picking a runner-up here, as I personally think it was Max von Sydow, though Kenneth Branagh or Nick Nolte make more sense.  I’m going to go with Max von Sydow, because, you know, it's my blog.

Who Would Win?: Von Sydow’s film is always going to hold him back, and against such a band of well-respected veterans who are hunting for first or “overdue” second Oscars, I doubt that Abdi could take it on a film debut.  Jones probably gets discredited because he lost to arguably the weakest on-paper contender of the past five years (Waltz didn’t need another Oscar and he was the only person who wasn’t pre-ordained on Oscar night).  That leaves Rush versus Harrelson, and the relative strength of his film with the Academy compared to the minimal support for Harrelson in 2009 means Rush was the strongest second place competitor.

But Could He Have Won?: Possibly in 2012.  Waltz in 2012 is definitely the weakest contender, and wasn’t in as big of a motion picture as Rush.  I think Rush could have taken him, but none of the other four.

Best Supporting Actress

The Second Places: Unlike Best Actor, we have at least one clear second place (Jennifer Lawrence in American Hustle) so we’re four down.  I think one could make the argument that Amy Adams was in second place in 2012, but I’ll go with the more conventional choice of Sally Field.  Looking at 2011, however, I genuinely feel that Melissa McCarthy with the film’s box office and her star power on the rise was above Berenice Bejo and Jessica Chastain.  Supporting Actress in 2010 is a genuine horse race, but Hailee Steinfeld seemed to be the one who was gaining speed toward the end.  Finally, there is the crapshoot over who was in second place to Mo’Nique in 2009-honestly, you could make an argument for anyone but Cruz and I’d buy it-I’m going with Kendrick because she was A) in a Best Picture nominee and B) the Academy likes younger women to win here.

Who Would Win?: A big part of why Lawrence lost was that she had won the year before.  Subtract that and I think she’s got this race.  However, she did win the year before and that issue still persists.  McCarthy is a fairly weak second place, so she’s out, as is Kendrick for Up in the Air (I still maintain that Julianne Moore wins Best Supporting Actress in 2009 if there’s no Mo’Nique, and she didn’t even get nominated).  That leaves Steinfeld and Field, and Field’s two previous Oscars take her down here (she’s a fairly weak guess for second place too).  Steinfeld takes it (oddly giving 2010 a second win).

But Could She Have Won?: Nope.  Leo is, on-paper, the weakest of the five recent Supporting Actress winners, and Steinfeld couldn’t best her-Mo’Nique, Spencer, Hathaway, and Nyong’o are all much harder to topple.

Best Actor

The Second Places: Once again, we have one truly competitive race in 2011, so George Clooney joins the lineup for The Descendants.  I think Clooney was also in second place in 2009 for his Best Picture nominee, so let’s keep him in twice.  This past year seems to have been Ejiofor more than Dern or DiCaprio (considering the BAFTA).  Honestly, no one really came close to Day-Lewis, but Jackman’s Golden Globe at least gives me a leg to stand on (plus, he was in a Best Picture nominee), so let’s throw in Jean Valjean.  Finally, I have long felt that when pitted against the surprise Javier Bardem and the young Franco/Eisenberg combo, we may well have seen back-to-back wins for Jeff Bridges if it weren’t for Colin Firth.

Who Would Win?: Clooney was stronger for The Descendants than Up in the Air in terms of momentum.  Jackman was a relatively weak nominee and in a musical no less (not a great genre to pick up a trophy from), so he’s out.  Bridges had JUST WON, and while I suspect that wouldn’t have mattered too much (there wasn’t any fatigue for him until after the True Grit campaign ended), I think that would have cost him against Clooney and Ejiofor.  Clooney actually was a very strong on-paper contender, and I’ll go with him.  He was leading a major Best Picture nominee, hadn’t won in a few years (oddly, people tend to win second trophies relatively close to their previous win, so get on it Jennifer Lawrence and Kate Winslet), and was still wildly popular (and there was a movement to give him a lead win).  I vote Clooney.

But Could He Have Won?: It’s hard to tell against Matthew McConaughey, and how you factor in Clooney’s Oscar for Argo.  I suspect that prior to Argo he could have beat him, but with two Oscars in hand, the Academy would have thought less of the idea and stuck with McConaughey.

Best Actress

The Second Places: I have maintained for years that Annette Bening was in second place all four of the times she was nominated, so count her in as our 2010 contender with The Kids Are All Right.  It’s hard to tell between Chastain and Riva in 2012-I am going to go with Chastain by a miniscule amount, though, as she was “second place” for most of the year and I think would have toppled the Amour star.  This past year was almost surely the Oscar-absent Amy Adams, the only non-winner in the bunch.  2009 was likely Meryl hunting for that third Oscar, and 2011 was the woman she beat to get it, Viola Davis.

Who Would Win?: Streep’s performance in Julie and Julia seems too frothy to take the trophy here, so she’s out (the only reason she was so close was that it was a relatively tame year for Best Actress, hence Helen Mirren getting in for the forgettable Last Station).  Ditto Amy Adams for American Hustle, which is only in second place because no one else was.  The remaining three women were all leading Best Picture nominees, but only one had genuine momentum for Oscar, and I am feeling that here: Viola Davis.  Davis picked up the SAG Award, led the biggest hit, and while Bening probably would get close, she sadly takes yet another second place.

But Could She Have Won?: She obviously couldn’t have beat Streep, and I'd argue that Bullock, Blanchett, and Lawrence had stronger locks on their trophies than Streep.  I do, however, think Davis would have taken down Natalie Portman.  Davis was in the more Academy friendly movie and Portman doesn’t give the same level of speeches and red carpet that Meryl Streep does.  I say Viola by a nose, but it would have been extremely close.

Best Director

The Second Places: Since we cannot go with Ben Affleck (oh how the Oscars wanted to), surely Steven Spielberg was the second place in 2012.  Ditto James Cameron, who infamously lost to his ex-wife for Avatar.  David Fincher’s The Social Network was probably closer to losing to David O. Russell’s The Fighter than one would suspect (The Social Network is not the Academy’s cup of tea), but it makes more sense for second place (let’s not rock the boat too much).  Steve McQueen surely was the second place this past year considering his film landed Best Picture.  And then there’s 2011, which was such a landslide for The Artist that it’s hard to tell whether Hugo (which tied the Best Picture winner for most wins) or The Descendants would have made it.  I’m going to split the difference and put Alexander Payne in here and Marty in the Best Picture race.

Who Would Win?: Not David Fincher, even if his film is almost surely the “best”-that film was too youth-oriented for Oscar.  I would normally say Spielberg in a walk, but he lost to weaker competition (had he lost to Affleck, for example, I would say he would have been the strongest), so I’m discounting him as well (this theorizing also points out the arbitrary nature of this endeavor, but again-still fun!).  Of the remaining three, Cameron is famously insufferable to work with and Payne’s film wasn’t that strong in the race (it only won one Oscar), so I’ll defer to McQueen, who directed a Best Picture winner.

But Could He Beat a Winner?: Best Director is rare because it has the only “surprise” winner of the past six years in a major category-Ang Lee in 2012.  Lee won because of a very weakened field (no Affleck to stampede to the trophy), and so yes, I think McQueen could have taken Lee.  I also think that he would have been able to stump Tom Hooper in 2010-The King’s Speech was fairly light as far as Oscar was concerned, and a larger epic could have knocked it out.  I’d also say that Hazanavicious would be bettered by McQueen-another case of a bigger film and bigger director.  McQueen comes the closest, therefore, to the “in any other year” argument, though I say that Bigelow trumps him.

Best Picture

The Second Places: Some of these, like Best Director, seem relatively easy.  Avatar, The Social Network, and as I’ve just mentioned Hugo all are strong favorites for the silver.  Gravity, with its seven Oscars and a Best Director trophy, is an easy choice.  2012, however, presents a conundrum.  Conventional wisdom would be that the Steven Spielberg biopic Lincoln would be the frontrunner, but Life of Pi was the award leader and took Best Director.  I think it was closer than Lincoln in the way that The Pianist probably got closer to Chicago than Gangs of New York.

Who Would Win?: Hugo and Life of Pi are films coasting off of major directors, and while that frequently gets you nominated, it rarely gets you a trophy-both are out.  The Social Network is too young for this crowd.  That leaves Avatar and Gravity, both of which are major box office draws in genres that Oscar abhors.  Gravity, though, got seven Oscars and a Best Director trophy-it was a very strong contender and crucially got an acting nomination.  I say it comes out on-top (though if these were the actual nominees vote-splitting would have been a very real possibility leading something like Hugo to get in, but I digress-we're going with Gravity).

But Could It Beat a Winner?: The weakest Best Picture was probably The Hurt Locker (which was a frontrunner, but mostly due to Bigelow, and a split could have happened).  However, it’s near impossible to see Gravity winning without Cuaron as well, so I’d say no, Gravity couldn’t take down a Best Picture winner.

And there we have it-overall, with the exception maybe of McQueen, we’ve proven that the phrase is uttered WAY too much by Oscar pundits.  What are your thoughts-do you agree/disagree with my reasoning?  Share in the comments!