OVP: Best Supporting Actor (2022)
The Nominees Were...
Brendan Gleeson, The Banshees of Inisherin
Brian Tyree Henry, Causeway
Judd Hirsch, The Fabelmans
Barry Keoghan, The Banshees of Inisherin
Ke Huy Quan, Everything Everywhere All at Once
My Thoughts: We are currently tracking to have 2022 entirely wrapped up by the end of July, and are moving into our final six Oscar categories, the Big 6 as they are referred to online (and in my house), the first being Best Supporting Actor. The field here, looking at it outside of the buzz of 2022, is oddly new for Oscar-only one previous nominee is in a bunch of four first-time candidates, which is strange for a category that feels like a retirement home for leading men in the past couple of decades. The repeat nominee, though, made history with his nomination, with the longest gap (42 years) between his first and second Oscar nominations.
Judd Hirsch's role in The Fabelmans is small, barely more than a cameo (he's onscreen for just 8 minutes), and comes across a bit odd within the movie itself for a nomination. He is meant to be a disruption in young Sammy's life, which he is, but he's not really called back enough to be consequential to our plot. Size shouldn't matter with roles (great acting comes in all sizes), but it's also more of a large approach than a nuanced one, and even within his film (with Paul Dano, who was not nominated, doing surprisingly understated work), I can't help but think this was a throwaway nomination when you didn't need to do that given Hirsch was already a nominee.
Brendan Gleeson, on the other hand, is wonderfully effective in The Banshees of Inisherin. Gleeson has a tricky part in the picture-while most of his costars have expressive roles, sharing their feelings openly through the script, he has to hold back, not openly underlining the frustration he has with his life & that the remainder of his life might be spent propping up Farrell's Padraic, while knowing his dreams aren't possible. He plays this well, telegraphing in curt statements & weary eyes, and by showing the differences between how he treats Padraic with those of other characters. I will argue that this role is lead, though it's borderline, and so I'm going to take a star away for category fraud, but that's the only thing that I can say against it, and what a gift it is that Gleeson got "Oscar nominee" added to his resumé after years of dedication.
Barry Keoghan is in his same film, and there's no way that you could call his work lead, he's very much in the supporting mold (thankfully Oscar has gotten over its aversion to nominating two actors from the same film, at least in supporting). Keoghan's work is on a ledge-it'd be easy to play as over-the-top, or even offensive, but he doesn't get there because he handles his Dominic with such care. The late-in-the-film moments with Kerry Condon, where he (after being kind of perverted toward her much of the movie) shows that he does genuinely care about her, and views her as his only shot at happiness, are flawlessly rendered, and provide dimension to his character without feeling like it's servicing the script. Truly a marvelous turn from an actor who has been growing to this moment.
If Gleeson has been the steady trouper & Keoghan the promising young thespian, Ke Huy Quan would be the ultimate comeback with his role in Everything Everywhere All at Once. A former child star who had faded completely from the Hollywood firmament, he proves that there are a lot of talented actors out there just waiting for the part to prove it. I love the way he tackles this role-supporting husband is easy to make into a stereotype or a cartoonish angel, but you understand in the way he approaches the part that his dreams were fulfilled, and he has to challenge the ideas that his wife & daughter's weren't, without letting it feel like a personal disappointment (which it obviously does in spurts).
Brian Tyree Henry's Oscar nomination was inevitable to anyone who saw his bravura work on the FX show Atlanta, where he has been one of the big stars of the cast. The film itself doesn't work the way it's supposed to (clearly operating on a budget, it needs more human bodies on the sides of the two main characters' world, waitresses & store clerks making it feel less hollow). Henry's nomination was unexpected given the low profile of his film, and at times it feels like (especially in the second half) the script doesn't know what to do with his character arch, and he gets lost in it, giving us too much elevation after a more subdued, calm first half. But it's still a good performance...it just doesn't stand up in a slate of great ones.
Other Precursor Contenders: The Globes gave their statue to Quan, with Gleeson, Keoghan, Brad Pitt (Babylon), and Eddie Redmayne (The Good Nurse) the losers, while Quan also won at SAG against Gleeson, Keoghan, Redmayne, & Paul Dano (The Fabelmans). BAFTA struck out on its own with Keoghan winning, here beating five nominees (BAFTA for some reason now has six nominees for acting): Quan, Gleeson, Redmayne, Michael Ward (Empire of Light), & Albrecht Schuch (All Quiet on the Western Front). Redmayne's name shows up the most, and so there's a case for him to be in sixth place, but I'm going to guess the overall love of The Fabelmans in the acting categories (two nominations) means Dano was just out-of-reach.
Performances I Would Have Nominated: Brad Pitt has indicated he wants to wind down his acting career. Given how good he was in Babylon, as a movie star who is moving beyond his years in the sun, you have to wonder if Oscar missed a chance to bookend one of the most impressive careers of his generation by honoring his brilliant work in Chazelle's picture.
Oscar’s Choice: Oscar loves a comeback story, and given the EEAAO love in general, Quan probably got a majority of the vote.
My Choice: I am going with Keoghan's role, which I think is a more impression arch and better-rendered with less to do than Quan's, though both are sensational. Third is Gleeson, who would get the bronze with or without my category fraud demerit (he'll be submitted for lead when we get to how I'd submit my personal ballot). Following him is Henry, then Hirsch.
Those are my thoughts-what are yours? Are you mad at me for abandoning the affable Quan or do you think that Keoghan was an underrated part of his movie? Why can't we have double nominees from the same film in lead again, since we've made progress in supporting? And was it Dano, Pitt, or Redymane in sixth place? Share in the comments!
No comments:
Post a Comment