1981 Oscar Viewing Project

We are officially announcing our 30th completed Oscar Viewing Project.  As of yesterday, I have officially seen all of the narrative, feature-length nominees from the ceremony, and as we do here, we'll be ranking all of the major categories.  You'll note with this list that part of the reason that I got some of these completed was that 1981 is one of the most repetitive Oscars ever-all five of the Best Picture nominees got Best Director nominations, and they produced half of the acting nominations (in the pre-2009 era, this was a pretty high metric).  In terms of the box office, though, this is who led the field:

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. On Golden Pond

3. Superman II

4. Arthur

5. Stripes

6. The Cannonball Run

7. Chariots of Fire

8. For Your Eyes Only

9. The Four Seasons

10. Time Bandits

Of these, I have seen only five of the top box office draws of the year.  The 1980's, especially the early 1980's, were still in the era where box office and Oscar's tastes were pretty much synonymous, so this is a relatively light list for Oscar nominees (as the only five films that I've seen are the five that are listed below).  I will for sure see Superman II & The Four Seasons before I complete the year for the My Ballot (where I pick the nominees...hopefully should complete that here by early June, though we'll do the 1957 My Ballot next)...the remainder are more of a question mark (make your cases for them in the comments).  If you're new here, also, look at the bottom of the page for links to all of our past 29 OVP's.

With that said, it's time to start impressing Jodie Foster, firing up your IBM computer, & wanting your MTV.  And of course, let's remember the movies...

(Note: Raiders of the Lost Ark received a Best Sound Editing Oscar at the ceremony as a special prize.  Given its nominations in other categories, I obviously saw this film, but wanted to make sure to note it-when we get to the My Ballot in the next two months for 1981, I will have this be a competitive race)

Note from John: When I did this series during the time when I wrote individual articles, and had this blog be a daily part of my life, I made a point of highlighting each nominee in my many write-ups.  While I will be writing these every time I complete a year (we'll have at least one OVP and/or My Ballot every month going forward), I can't make that time commitment, either in terms of number of articles or in terms of giving each nominee their due with a mention.  I promise, though, that I have given each nominee their due under the confines of the specific category while making my rankings (and of course I've seen every single nominated picture), including giving higher rankings to movies I didn't like if the craft was better than ones I did like (Oscar should consider that!).  Hopefully you enjoy the trimmed-down, but still devoted to the original concept version of the OVP we'll have going forward!

Picture

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. On Golden Pond

4. Chariots of Fire

5. Atlantic City

The Lowdown: This is, all things considered, one of the best Best Picture lineups that Oscar assembled during the 1980's, an era of moviemaking I generally find a bit underwhelming.  None of these movies is bad, but the two truly great ones of the lineup are Raiders and Reds, both from directors at the peak of their creative powers.  I'm going to favor Spielberg's Raiders.  It's less in Oscar's wheelhouse (but these are my choices for a reason), but I think that it is a tighter film, and defines the action-adventure genre.  Reds will be showing up again though (and as you'll see in the coming categories, is a movie I loved).

Director

1. Steven Spielberg (Raiders of the Lost Ark)

2. Warren Beatty (Reds)

3. Mark Rydell (On Golden Pond)

4. Hugh Hudson (Chariots of Fire)

5. Louis Malle (Atlantic City

The Lowdown: We're also going to give Spielberg his second OVP statue for Best Director, once again for a movie he didn't actually win for (can't stress enough how the links to the years we've covered are at the bottom of this page).  It's such a perfectly shot movie, giving us Harrison Ford's iconic archaeologist and a series of flawless adventure sequences.  Beatty's breathtaking too, though, particularly that effortlessly romantic scene at the train station.

Actor

1. Warren Beatty (Reds)

2. Henry Fonda (On Golden Pond)

3. Paul Newman (Absence of Malice)

4. Burt Lancaster (Atlantic City)

5. Dudley Moore (Arthur)

The Lowdown: Don't feel too bad for Beatty, though, as he's going to get a Best Actor statue for our OVP next.  The big fight here for me is between Beatty, whose John Reed is such an impassioned, imperfect example of a revolutionary (pun intended) man, bitter about his inability to be everything he dreamed (but still accomplishing true greatness).  Fonda is excellent in On Golden Pond, wrapping up a career that surely should've gotten an Oscar by then, but as a reminder we pick these winners in a vacuum, so it's possible that we're turning down Fonda's only shot at an OVP win from me, but objectively Beatty is stronger.

Actress

1. Diane Keaton (Reds)

2. Meryl Streep (The French Lieutenant's Woman)

3. Katharine Hepburn (On Golden Pond)

4. Marsha Mason (Only When I Laugh)

5. Susan Sarandon (Atlantic City)

The Lowdown: With the exception of Sarandon (who I think doesn't get Malle's tricky material) this is an underrated "all-timer" lineup, including the best thing I've seen (to date) from Marsha Mason.  For the win, though, it's between Streep and Keaton.  Streep's French Lieutenant's Woman has its detractors (including Streep herself), but I love what she does here, defining two women in similar fashions, both controlled by the same man.  There was a time I considered giving this to Streep (whom, it should be noted, has yet to win one of our OVP's or My Ballot's), but Keaton's sensational here, and giving the best dramatic performance of her career (don't you wish she'd do this instead of yet another spin on Annie Hall just once more?).

Supporting Actor

1. Jack Nicholson (Reds)

2. John Gielgud (Arthur)

3. Howard Rollins, Jr. (Ragtime)

4. Ian Holm (Chariots of Fire)

5. James Coco (Only When I Laugh)

The Lowdown: A lot of first-time OVP rendezvous this year with actors like Hepburn, Mason, Sarandon, Lancaster, & Newman, but it's hard not to think getting to talk about Jack for the first time is the biggest highlight of the bunch.  One of my all-time favorite actors, and you see why here.  His Eugene O'Neill is ruthless, him taking on the role of the "scorned lover" so deliciously ("you're a cheap gutter whore from Portland" being one of the most quotable lines he nails here).  Gielgud is delightful in Arthur and Rollins is the best part of Ragtime, but I am going to give this to Jack (who is definitely in the running to get the most total OVP and My Ballot acting statues before this is over).

Supporting Actress

1. Maureen Stapleton (Reds)

2. Melinda Dillon (Absence of Malice)

3. Elizabeth McGovern (Ragtime)

4. Jane Fonda (On Golden Pond)

5. Joan Hackett (Only When I Laugh)

The Lowdown: Yes, you're reading that right.  For the first (and perhaps only?) time, we are giving all four of the OVP acting statues to the same film, a movie that wasn't able to win Best Picture.  Unlike the other three acting categories, though, Stapleton doesn't have a lot of nearby options that would be respectable choices to beat her.  She nails this part, giving her Emma Goldman an electricity that makes you understand her importance in every scene she's in.  Dillon, McGovern, & Fonda all have their moments, and are roughly on-par (without Stapleton this would've been a more competitive field), but Stapleton being there makes it easy.

Adapted Screenplay

1. The French Lieutenant's Woman

2. On Golden Pond

3. Prince of the City

4. Pennies from Heaven

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: A particularly weak lineup that isn't entirely Oscar's fault (virtually all of the best films of 1981 were original ideas, unimaginable today), for me it's a contest between the first two, as I thought the screenplays on the remaining pictures were a yawn.  I'm going to give it to The French Lieutenant's Woman, though.  While On Golden Pond had far more quotable lines ("you're my knight in shining armor..." being a classic speech), I think that it doesn't tread deeply enough in the relationship between real-life father-and-daughter Hank & Jane, and I was totally sold on the gimmick of The French Lieutenant's Woman being both a story within a story, something that wasn't in the John Fowles' novel.

Original Screenplay

1. Reds

2. Atlantic City

3. Chariots of Fire

4. Arthur

5. Absence of Malice

The Lowdown: On the flip side, while this isn't that great of a lineup, it at least has one terrific script in the bunch.  Reds is phenomenal, and rises above the cost of an epic (i.e. that the screenplay is regularly the weakest part of it) by giving us a genuine, enthralling love story between two people who can't seem to live without each other (even if they might have to).  Atlantic City has a lovely gimmick, and Chariots of Fire is moving (and Arthur, specifically the parts with Gielgud, can be funny), but none of them can compete with Reds, the one triumph in this field (that should've included Raiders of the Lost Ark).

Foreign Language Film

1. Mephisto (Hungary)

2. Muddy River (Japan)

3. The Boat is Full (Switzerland)

4. Man of Iron (Poland)

5. Three Brothers (Italy)

The Lowdown: One of those years where the Foreign Language Film (now the International Feature Film) category features movies that were only cited for this prize, and nowhere else, so this is your only chance to speak about any of the contenders.  The best of this bunch are Mephisto, a spin on the Faust concept (literally...the main character is an actor best known for playing the devil), and Muddy River, a moving look at friendship across income levels through the eyes of a child.  I'm going with Mephisto, because I think it's grander and has a better central performance from Klaus Marie Brandeur (it also won the Oscar), but Muddy River is not far off and really worth your time if you've never heard of it.

Original Score

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Chariots of Fire

3. On Golden Pond

4. Ragtime

5. Dragonslayer

The Lowdown: Honestly, in a normal year this would be a slam dunk for something like On Golden Pond, a superb score that can barely muster a bronze here.  Raiders and Chariots are two of the most iconic film scores for a reason, and it's hard to argue with either of them (fun fact: I played "Hymne" by Vangelis for a piano recital when I was in middle school and still have the sheet music for it, even though I don't even have a piano).  I'm going to go with Raiders because I have more of an emotional connection to it, and because I think it's most consistent throughout the actual movie, but this is a coin toss race.

Original Song

1. "Endless Love" (Endless Love)

2. "For Your Eyes Only" (For Your Eyes Only)

3. "Arthur's Theme" (Arthur)

4. "The First Time It Happens" (The Great Muppet Caper)

5. "One More Hour" (Ragtime)

The Lowdown: If you look just at the movie titles here, I'm definitely not picking the best films of the bunch.  Bette Midler quite famously did a send-up of how bad the movies were in this lineup when she presented it (check it out if you haven't seen it...it was the funniest moment in an otherwise pretty tepid ceremony, comically speaking), and both of the Top 2 got the worst of it.  But I don't really connect with Christopher Cross, and I think "Endless Love" is both a moving little ballad, and one that fits the saccharine movie it's housing, just a bit better than the also good "For Your Eyes Only."  Had "Hey a Movie" gotten in from The Great Muppet Caper, we'd be having a reranking here as I always love the Muppets onscreen.

Sound

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. Pennies from Heaven

4. Outland

5. On Golden Pond

The Lowdown: We are once again pitting Raiders vs. Reds, and once again Raiders is coming out on top.  It's just hard to argue with the play on the Saturday morning adventure serial, but now in the mold of a giant movie blockbuster.  Reds is subtler with its sound work, and would make a fine win as well...particularly the crowd scenes feel authentic, melded with the music, but still have a grand aura.  Pennies from Heaven, the token musical that always shows up for Sound...is fine.

Art Direction

1. Heaven's Gate

2. Raiders of the Lost Ark

3. Reds

4. The French Lieutenant's Woman

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: The best lineup of the bunch, there is not a single bad nominee in this group, and any of them would work as a winner.  I loved the shifts in time being played with in French Lieutenant's Woman, the over-abundance of sets in Ragtime (you understand why this became a musical), the book-laden interiors of Reds, and the continental jumping of Raiders.  But if I have to pick a winner, it needs to be Heaven's Gate, a really grand movie that was (at the time) one of the most famous flops ever made, but it looks spectacular, and I love the shifting stages & devotion to the western on display.

Cinematography

1. Reds

2. Raiders of the Lost Ark

3. Excalibur

4. On Golden Pond

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: For the first (and only) time in this article, you will see me ever so slightly favor Reds over Raiders.  Despite loving them both, this is the only Oscar contest that I feel Beatty's film exceeds.  I love the camerawork in Raiders (that rolling boulder...come on now, it's iconic for a reason), but I can't help but feel that the use of temperature (you can practically feel the warmth & cold emanating off of the screen in Reds), plus the famous train scene, are impossible to deny.  Kudos also to Excalibur, which has the feel of a shoe-string budget but still gives us glorious looks at Nicol Williamson & Helen Mirren in their entrancing witchiness.

Costume

1. Reds

2. The French Lieutenant's Woman

3. Ragtime

4. Pennies from Heaven

5. Chariots of Fire

The Lowdown: With Indy's fedora left off the dais, it's a contest between the period work of Reds and the period work of The French Lieutenant's Woman (don't look at me like that-I have at least one contemporary film on the list currently for the My Ballot...it's Oscar that never goes there).  Of the two, I go with Reds because I think it is more consistent overall.  There's more care put into French Lieutenant's when it comes to the period stuff than the modern scenes, and Ragtime behind it doesn't break the mold in the way that the of-the-people looks in Reds achieve.

Film Editing

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. The French Lieutenant's Woman

4. Chariots of Fire

5. On Golden Pond

The Lowdown: Again, another Raiders & Reds contest (our final one), with everyone else just getting the scraps.  I think the editing exhibits why these two tower above.  Raiders is fast-paced, effortlessly so in a way that makes every scene feel timeless (which, after nearly 45 years of existence, it really is), while Reds gets a slow-burn, us investing continually as the movie finds its own romance.  The timelessness wins it for Raiders, though (kudos also to French Lieuentant's for working so well with the time jumps).

Makeup

1. An American Werewolf in London

2. Heartbeeps

The Lowdown: We have a pair of two-wide races to complete this year's Oscar's, starting with Makeup (for the record, both of these categories I'll go five-wide when I pick my personal choices).  This was the first year of the Best Makeup category, and they did something that would become commonplace at the Oscars: nominating Rick Baker (the maestro behind An American in Werewolf) and giving the title of "Oscar-nominated" to a truly heinous movie.  There are few films as bad as Heartbeeps, but what's worse is the makeup in it is bizarrely lazy, particularly when you had much better options nominated in 1981 (it's just Bernadette Peters & Andy Kaufman covered in a plastic sheen).  Conversely, An American Werewolf is one of the best achievements of Rick Baker's career, so an easy call for him to take this.

Visual Effects

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Dragonslayer

The Lowdown: A second category that is only two-wide, we have two films competing against each other in another lopsided victory where I definitely go with Oscar's choice.  At this point, anything George Lucas or Steven Spielberg were creating was foundational to the future of blockbuster cinema, and Raiders is a genius use of practical and special effects, particularly the face-melting scene when they open the Ark.  Dragonslayer, though, unlike Heartbeeps is a genuinely quality product and earned this spot (and will likely make my My Ballot as well for its great use of the imposing dragon in the picture).

Past Oscar Viewing Projects: 1931-32, 1948, 1957, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

OVP: Actor (2002)

OVP: Best Actor (2002)

The Nominees Were...

Adrien Brody, The Pianist

Nicolas Cage, Adaptation

Michael Caine, The Quiet American

Daniel Day-Lewis, Gangs of New York

Jack Nicholson, About Schmidt

My Thoughts: We are hitting the Top 5, and one of the rare races in Academy history that featured five winners (four previous, one on Oscar night, and one guy who'd win two more in the years that followed).  I've talked a lot about the Oscar ceremony in 2002 for a couple of reasons.  First, I remember it vividly (we're still in the era where I was hyper-aware of the Oscar race and religiously reading magazines & articles about it online).  Second, we're going to hit a time relatively soon (probably in 2024 based on the pace of these articles) where I didn't actually watch the Oscars because I wasn't old enough (my first Oscars was 1994, my first completed Oscars where I was genuinely following along was 1995) and so I want to get out my first-hand knowledge while I can.  But the biggest reason is that 2002 was one of those rare years where pretty much everything was up-in-the-air...and on Oscar night, surprises abounded.

One of those surprises happened in this race, when Adrien Brody stunned everyone in the Kodak Theater (particularly Halle Berry) when he won the Oscar.  As you'll see in the precursors, Brody wasn't the favorite here (it was thought to be a battle between Daniel Day-Lewis & Jack Nicholson).  Still, the Academy had good taste.  Brody, for all of the career setbacks that happened after this, gives an astounding, lived-in performance in The Pianist, the way that he takes this gregarious, charming man at the onset and continually has to look inward as the world takes & takes away everything that he has to give.  He truly makes the film.

Nicholson was clearly hoping to get that fourth Oscar and tie Kate Hepburn in 2002, and I suspect was close to victory.  His work here is not reminiscent of much of the "Wacky Jack" that we came to expect in the 1990's (culminating in his third Oscar win for As Good As It Gets), and it pays off, giving us a complete performance of an incomplete man.  I love the way that he internally wrestles in the earlier half of the movie between feelings he knows are wrong and feelings that he can't help but share...it feels realistic to show a brittle man, only capable of a modicum of change.

All of these men have Oscars, but only Michael Caine doesn't have one for lead actor, a point he made in 2002 when he was pushing hard for this citation.  I think Caine is very good here (I honestly think this is the best Oscar lineup in a year that's sprinkled with them-2002 is a vintage that has held up), playing a deeply complicated man trying to fight for the affections of one woman.  What makes Caine's acting so specific (I'm a fan) is the way that he can switch so evenly between a calming demeanor and destroying a man's soul in the blink of an eye.  In some ways I liken him to Anthony Hopkins, where he's miraculous at one skill-set, and knows just how to use it in each character, which he does here.

Nicolas Cage's performance in Adaptation to some degree marked the end of Cage's career as a serious actor for the next couple of decades (countless direct-to-video movies, a weird feud with Sean Penn, and eventually parodying himself on film would ensue), but it's a nice swan song to one of the more inventive actors of the 1990's.  Cage suffers the most at the hands of Charlie Kaufman's wandering typewriter, but in the first half he's really excellent as two men, one fictional, one real, and does a good job deciphering the two figures for the audience.

Our final nomination is for Daniel Day-Lewis, in what might have been his most immersive role-to-date.  Bill the Butcher, where he literally covered his eye with glass to simulate having a glass eye (what?!?) might be something he hopefully took up with a therapist (I'm sorry, I love him, but that's too method for me), but the work stands for itself.  Day-Lewis is astounding, stealing every scene he's in, and honestly saving the movie himself.  No one else is doing what he's doing here, creating the kind of Travis Bickle-style figure that Scorsese specializes in, but putting him in the middle of Civil War-Era New York City.  What results is one of the best pieces of work from one of our most committed thespians.

Other Precursor Contenders: The Globes break out their nominees between Drama and Comedy/Musical, so we have ten names from their ceremony.  Drama went with Nicholson atop Brody, Caine, Day-Lewis, & Leonardo DiCaprio (Catch Me If You Can), while Comedy/Musical gave their statue to Richard Gere (Chicago) atop Cage, Kieran Culkin (Igby Goes Down), Hugh Grant (About a Boy), and Adam Sandler (Punch-Drunk Love).  The SAG Award went to Day-Lewis, and was nearly the Oscar lineup except Caine was skipped for Gere.  BAFTA also went to Day-Lewis, and they had the Oscar lineup verbatim.  Gere almost certainly was sixth place, and in a similar fashion to Dennis Quaid & Alfred Molina in supporting, his best shot (to that point) for Oscar glory didn't result in any nominations in the years that followed.

Actors I Would Have Nominated: As I said above, this is a terrific lineup-no bad performances, no even middling performances, all ranging from brilliant-to-very-good.  But there's room for improvement.  Specifically Leonardo DiCaprio's best bit of acting (in Catch Me If You Can) deserved some sort of inclusion here-he's never been this natural & movie star charismatic in the years since.

Oscar’s Choice: Brody, likely due to the strong movement toward The Pianist (and the fact that everyone else in the lineup already had Oscars), pulled off an iconic win that would be impossible for his career to top in the decades that followed.

My Choice: Brody gets it.  In a strong lineup, he gives physically & emotionally the most captivating performance of the quintet.  I'd follow him with Day-Lewis, and then Nicholson, Caine, & Cage.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Is everyone here on Team Brody (a win that looks pretty strong in retrospect) or does someone want to advocate for the other legends?  Who came closer to the victory-Jack or DDL?  And will Richard Gere ever find his way into this mix again?  Share your thoughts below in the comments!

Also in 2002: Supporting Actress, Supporting Actor, Adapted Screenplay, Original Screenplay, Foreign Language Film, Animated Feature Film, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Original Score, Original Song, Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume, Film Editing, Visual Effects, Makeup, Previously in 2002

Past Best Actor Contests: 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020

OVP: Tommy (1975)

Film: Tommy (1975)

Stars: Ann-Margret, Oliver Reed, Roger Daltrey, Elton John, Tina Turner, Eric Clapton, Keith Moon, Paul Nicholas, Jack Nicholson

Director: Ken Russell

Oscar History: 2 nomination (Best Actress-Ann-Margret, Best Scoring)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2020 Saturdays with the Stars series, we highlight a different actress known as an iconic "film sex symbol."  This month, our focus is on Ann-Margret-click here to learn more about Ms. Ann-Margret (and why I picked her), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

By the mid-1970's, Ann-Margret's career had taken some interesting turns.  By 1975 she was only 34, but that was considered a bit older back then than it would be today, and so in theory her days as a sex kitten/symbol were waning, if not gone.  Ann-Margret had a very successful nightclub act (oftentimes incorporating George Burns), but her film career was acknowledging that she was aging, and that she wanted to expand as an actress & play against type.  As you've seen throughout our year devoted to famous sex symbols, playing against type was usually a disaster for actresses most famous for their appearance, but Ann-Margret defied that, openly finding parts that skewed or countered her glamour without it affecting her popularity.  She had one of her biggest successes in this style of "deglam" role (as it would be known in the mid-aughts) with Tommy, which won her her second (and to date, final) Academy Award nomination.

(Spoilers Head) Tommy is, for those who are not familiar, a rock opera (give or take The Wall, the most famous of the era's rock operas), which was a subgenre of film/musical theater that hit its popularity peak in the 1970's.  It focuses on Tommy (Daltrey), who as a child saw his mother Nora (Ann-Margret) and her new lover Frank (Reed) accidentally kill Tommy's father, who has returned from war after being presumed dead.  As a result, Tommy goes deaf-mute-blind, and neither Frank nor Nora can get him out of this state.  Eventually Tommy turns to pinball, and though he cannot see or hear the sounds, becomes something of a novelty attraction since he can feel the machine, and as a result is the greatest player in the world.  Tommy eventually breaks out of his near catatonic state to be able to speak, see, & hear, and develops a Christ-like following, but that wanes when it appears as if he doesn't have anything to offer his followers, and when he makes them like he was (deaf, mute, & blind) so they appreciate life more, they attack him, killing Frank & Nora, and eventually Tommy is left, finally free of his parents & his influences, and embraces a state of nirvana at the same place where he was conceived at the beginning of the film.

I...am surprised at how cogent that plot summary sounds, because Tommy is anything but cogent.  There are repeated detours throughout the movie to be able to have psychedelic musical numbers, and to capitalize on some of the rock cameos in the film.  Tina Turner, Elton John, Eric Clapton, and even (in a Carnal Knowledge reunion) Jack Nicholson all show up in various roles, getting their own songs.  The film's roots are firmly in the anti-establishment & being critical of their parents' generation (Clapton's preacher leads a parish that deifies Marilyn Monroe as a god, an indictment on celebrity-worship), but they also have the obvious overtones of drug use, particularly Turner's "Acid Queen."  

The cameos are fun initially, and certainly in a "WTF" way, but I will admit that other than Nicholson's (which I didn't know was coming), I found them a bit overlong and increasingly un-fun, which is how I'd describe Tommy as a whole.  The music is great ("Pinball Wizard" continues to hold up 45 years after the fact), but it keeps underlining the same points-every chorus seems to repeat one too many times, and the fat on the film is plentiful when it needs some leaning up.  The movie's motif is also dated, and its message is warped in retrospect considering so many of the "rebel acts" in this film would eventually become the establishment.  In 1975 the Who might have represented counterculture revolutionaries, but in 2020, a Millennial (like myself) knows people like the Who, Tina Turner, & Elton John as figures who become mega-millionaires that are so ingrained in corporate culture they literally headlined the Super Bowl, the most conventional of commercial American inventions.  As a result, the movie reads as false in its message, even if I understand its impact.

Ann-Margret's nomination was likely a result of both her taking on an atypical role and the dearth of good roles for women in 1975 (generally considered to be one of, if not the, worst years for Best Actress).  Her role here is intriguing, but eventually it just becomes exploitive, and I don't know what she's getting at.  It's obvious that director Ken Russell wanted to trade on Ann-Margret being the fantasy of a generation of young men by both deeply sexualizing her (there are multiple scenes in the film where it appears the actress is in the throes of an orgasm), and then skewing that sexualization (one of those orgasmic scenes, she's writhing in a puddle of baked beans & mud).  It's less of a work of acting and more a performance piece, and I left admitting that I saw something of note, but not necessarily of value.

1975 is where we're going to leave Ann-Margret.  The actress who took the sex symbol role and found a way to not only transform it in the 1970's, but to win industry accolades for her work, did make more worthwhile movies, and was a star for much of the 1970's with films like Joseph Andrews and Magic (and at one point, despite being 37, was considered for the role of Sandy in Grease), before eventually doing most of her career work in TV movies and guest appearances.  Next month, we will look at one last actress, a contemporary of Ann-Margret's whose career mirrored that of a classic sex symbol...even if it also seemed to hallmark the end of the trope.

OVP: Carnal Knowledge (1971)

Film: Carnal Knowledge (1971)

Stars: Jack Nicholson, Art Garfunkel, Ann-Margret, Candice Bergen, Rita Moreno, Carol Kane

Director: Mike Nichols

Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Supporting Actress-Ann-Margret)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2020 Saturdays with the Stars series, we highlight a different actress known as an iconic "film sex symbol."  This month, our focus is on Ann-Margret-click here to learn more about Ms. Ann-Margret (and why I picked her), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

We're going to jump seven years into the future in our series for two reasons.  One, we have a lot to cover (Ann-Margret has been an enduring star for many decades), and two, Ann-Margret's career post Viva Las Vegas was kind of a bust.  Similar to some of the other stars we've talked about this year (like Jayne Mansfield), after just a few years as the center-of-the-world, the public began to crave a new star on their screens, and Ann-Margret could only be the "new star" for so long.  She had bad instincts during this time period (she turned down Cat Ballou, which went to Jane Fonda & opened up new doors in her career, and according to legend also turned down the part of Liesl in The Sound of Music, though I can't tell if this is just urban myth or is based in reality like the Cat Ballou decline, which actually happened), and her movies frequently had her being overshadowed by her male leads.  Instead, she struck up a Vegas nightclub act during this time frame (a successful one), and went on USO tours.  That is, until Mike Nichols gave her a role that would change her life.

(Spoilers Ahead) Carnal Knowledge is not about Ann-Margret's Bobbie, not really.  It's instead centered around the lives of two pals, Sandy (Garfunkel) and Jonathan (Nicholson), and their 25-year friendship.  Both men, virgins at the onset of the film, have completely different views on women; Jonathan considers them to be "ballbusters," something there for him to enjoy & control, while Sandy deifies them, treating them as life-changing.  

The movie is divided into three chapters.  In the first, they both fall in love with the same girl, Susan (Bergen), who attends their college.  Susan thinks Sandy is a nice guy, but is attracted to the excitement of Jonathan, and sleeps with him first.  As the relationship moves, though, Jonathan becomes angry that Susan doesn't give him the contentment that she gives Sandy.  As a result, they break up (Susan & Sandy marry), and we flash forward to the future, where Jonathan begins pursuing Bobbie, a gorgeous women whom he finds desirable, but eventually too complicated (because she is undergoing depression, and is desperate for him to love her in a traditional way, which Jonathan is not capable of because he views women as objects-of-desire).  Bobbie attempts suicide as a result of the depression, which we find in the final chapter led to Jonathan marrying and then divorcing her.  In this chapter, Sandy has found love with a new young woman named Jennifer (Kane), but has outgrown Jonathan-they have a falling out (not before Jonathan accidentally, wordlessly acknowledges that he & Susan had a relationship during a sadistic slideshow of his past sex partners), and we then see that Sandy truly leaves Jonathan behind, still financially successful but truly incapable of love.  The final scene is a pre-scripted monologue he has with a prostitute (Moreno) who talks about a man's power over her, as this is now the only way that Jonathan (who has increasingly suffered from impotence problems) can achieve an erection.

There are parts of Carnal Knowledge that simply wouldn't work today, and not just because of the deep core of misogyny that runs through it.  The film is an obvious commentary about the Sexual Revolution, and in this case two men trying to make sense of it in completely different ways, and that wouldn't make sense today.  Honestly-it's difficult for me to understand what of this film is dated & what of it is meant as a critique of these two men as a modern audience member.  In some respects I think it does this rather well-it's unflinching, nasty, & not forgiving of its main characters, particularly Nicholson's Jonathan.

But it also dismisses the women at its core.  The problematic people in this film are the men, and any audience member now would be able to tell that.  Jonathan's emotional abuse of Susan & Bobbie is rigid & hate-filled, but not much worse is Sandy begging these women to define him, to be the missing piece he isn't offering them (and to constantly blame them rather than himself when they don't).  Their friendship is unhealthy & they bring out the worst in each other, but that doesn't mean that the director's treatment of the women is much better.  Most of the women as written are nothing parts (Kane's Jennifer doesn't even speak), and with the exception of Moreno in a 5-minute long cameo at the end (where her reciting a script for money shows that she, ultimately, is in control), there's no focus on these women as anything other than through the eyes of the two male leads.

That isn't for lack of trying, though, on the part of Ann-Margret.  As written, Bobbie is a throwaway role; she's simply a gorgeous woman who wants to get married to this guy that she loves, and who is incapable of loving her.  But Bobbie is the crux of the film-she needs to both show us someone that we think is a throwaway one-night-stand, and then have it dawn on the audience (but not Jonathan) that Bobbie is perfect for Jonathan, and that if he can't make it work with her, it spells his doom.  

It's a tricky part, not least of which is that most of that isn't on the paper, and that might've been why Nichols struggled for months to cast it (supposedly everyone from Ellen Burstyn to Raquel Welch to Dyan Cannon to, in a twist, Jane Fonda, pursued the part but didn't land it), but in Ann-Margret he cast it flawlessly.  Ann-Margret is not the actress that Jane Fonda or Ellen Burstyn are, but she knew a good thing when it landed in her lap, and she understood Bobbie.  The way she plays her is marvelous-she shows Bobbie as a girl who had likely been worshipped by men her whole life, but is now on the cusp of thirty, and doesn't understand that while men still pursue her, they aren't willing to give her everything she desired (namely, a traditional family life).  Ann-Margret, still a knockout, but several years removed from her peak time in the spotlight, finds a way to impart that persona into Bobbie, playing her as someone who understands that her time-in-the-sun is over & she might've missed her window for happiness if it doesn't work with Jonathan.  There's a sexism in that reading, but it's the one that Nichols gives us, and I think Ann-Margret plays it well.

Targets (1968)

Film: Targets (1968)
Stars: Tim O'Kelly, Boris Karloff, Arthur Peterson, Monte Landis, Nancy Hsueh, Peter Bogdonavich
Director: Peter Bogdonavich
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

When you read this I'll be coming back from a sojourn to visit my parents (we've all been socially distancing to do this trip, don't worry), and on that trip, I'll be listening to new episodes of my all-time favorite podcast, You Must Remember This.  This season, Karina Longworth is taking an in-depth look at the career of Polly Platt, an Oscar-nominated art director who was most famous for decades as a creative contributor (and frequent producer) of some of the most ingenious projects to come out of Hollywood, ranging from The Last Picture Show to Broadcast News to The Other Side of the Wind.  Platt's first significant film was the 1968 Roger Corman movie Targets, which was also the directorial debut of her then-husband Peter Bogdonavich.  The next episode I have in the series apparently goes quite in-depth into this movie, and since I'd always wanted to see it (and a recording of it was sitting on my DVR thanks to the eternal gift-giver TCM), this felt like the perfect time to take the opportunity.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie tells two seemingly unconnected tales that end up coming together in a petrifying final sequence.  The first story is one that Bogdonavich would intersperse into a lot of his movies and certainly into his decades of colorful anecdotes about Hollywood: the story of a Classic Hollywood actor.  In this case it's Byron Orlok (Karloff), an aging horror film actor who wants out of the business after finishing his last movie The Terror (which was, in fact, a real-life horror movie that starred Karloff and a pre-fame Jack Nicholson, so your eyes are not deceiving you when you see Jack Nicholson randomly show up in Targets, and according to legend around this movie, Nicholson sought after the other lead in this movie but wasn't given it).  Orlok has a curmudgeonly respect for his assistant Jenny (Hsueh) and a young screenwriter-director named Sammy (Bogdonavich), who has written an actually strong film that might give Orlok a new chapter in his career (meta, right?).

The other aspect of the story is around Bobby Thompson (O'Kelly), an all-American guy (handsome, young, veteran) who seems to have the world-on-the-sleeve, but whose only passion appears to be firearms.  Throughout the movie we see Bobby pretend to kill people, frequently stockpiling more and more weapons while his wife and his parents take little notice.  He eventually goes on a shooting spree, first killing his wife & mother, then shooting people randomly from a tower overlooking a freeway, and then finally shooting people at a drive-in...a drive-in showing The Terror where Byron Orlok is set to make his final appearance before retreating into retirement.

The movie up until the shooting scene at the drive-in is interesting if not always compelling.  The drive-in sequence in many ways anticipates another classic New Hollywood movie, one that I really want to name-check but it's such a surprise what happens at the end of the picture that I don't feel I should...suffice it to say, this movie was influential.  But before that scene, the O'Kelly scenes are oddly bereft of emotion.  This is a choice that I think works in hindsight, but I can't imagine how Bogdonavich had the foresight to think of making such a prototypical, 21st Century villain.  At the time, the character was based in large part on Charles Whitman, who killed 17 people in 1966, many of them at random from a tower at the University of Texas (Whitman also killed his wife and mother before his shooting rampage), and if you look at photos of Whitman and O'Kelly, they do share a similarity.  What makes Targets prescient, though, is that Whitman/Bobby Thompson fit the mold of what we think of as a 21st Century villain-straight, white, male loner obsessed with collecting weaponry & risking other people's safety.

This is what makes the final sequence at the drive-in so electric.  We know at this point that Bobby Thompson is a monster, solely intent on increasing his body count before capture or death.  We watch in horror as an audience of cars slowly realize that the danger is not the villain on the big-screen (Karloff's Orlok in The Terror), but instead a more real, actual danger.  People open their cars or speed away, trying to escape, but in the process turn on the lights, making them easier targets.  It's petrifying-one of the scariest things I've ever seen a movie.  All-the-while, there is Byron Orlok, as we come-to-understand his retirement is more about shutting out the world as he is afraid of death, not realizing that he's being confronted with it in very tangible, absolute terms.  When Orlok ultimately is the person who stops Thompson, he states "is that what I was afraid of?" as if realizing that death can come in many forms.  The film itself isn't strong enough to warrant 5-stars (the earlier sequences are too prosaic), but this is a fascinating film and a strong debut from Bogdonavich, who was about to make a trio of celebrated movies (The Last Picture Show, What's Up Doc?, and Paper Moon), and features a mesmerizing piece-of-work from Karloff, giving his final onscreen performance.

OVP: Five Easy Pieces (1970)

Film: Five Easy Pieces (1970)
Stars: Jack Nicholson, Karen Black, Susan Anspach, Lois Smith, Ralph Waite
Director: Bob Rafelson
Oscar History: 4 nominations (Best Picture, Actor-Jack Nicholson, Supporting Actress-Karen Black, Original Screenplay)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

It's always a little bit odd to see Jack in a film before Cuckoo's Nest, when he started his slow descent into the crazy, wild-eyed cartoon that we know-and-admire from The Shining or Batman.  Before that, while he always had that signature intensity and a carnality in his onscreen personas, he was still trying to prove himself as a genius for his generation, one of the truly great screen presences.  In many ways, this mirrors what happened to his Ironweed costar Meryl Streep, who also eventually became so famous and so identified with her offscreen persona that it became impossible for her to incarnate character acting roles.  Five Easy Pieces is one of the first films in Nicholson's legend as a great actor, coming a year after his big breakthrough in Easy Rider, and was his first nomination for Best Lead Actor at the Academy Awards, a category he'd compete in a total of eight times (to date).  The film has the feel of a 1970's classic, occasionally too lost and dated in the years since to land all of the punches it surely would have hit in 1970, but Nicholson is sensational as a little boy lost in the violent persona he's crafted in his adulthood.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film centers on Bobby Dupea (Nicholson), an oil rig worker with a brainy side, as he was once a child prodigy & classic pianist.  He spends his days cheating on his air-headed girlfriend Rayette (Black), who whines about the world while blasting Tammy Wynette records.  After finding out from his sister Partita (Smith) that their father has suffered two strokes and may soon die, Bobby returns back to the privileged place of his youth, where he begins to fall for his brother's fiance Catherine (Anspach).  Along the way, we start to learn about the world that Bobby abandoned, and the clear emotional scars a complicated relationship with his father have left him with, to the point where he doesn't seem capable of falling in love with a woman in the traditional sense.  The film ends brutally, with Catherine telling Bobby he's incapable of loving anyone, and then he proves her right by abandoning a pregnant Rayette at a truck stop while he heads as a hitchhiker up to Alaska, a callback to an earlier scene in the film where Toni Basil's Terry Grouse (yes, Toni Basil of "oh Mickey, you're so fine" fame) is discussing she and her friend's obsession with going to Alaska where it's "clean."

The film has a definite 1970's mold, with emotionally unavailable men trying to connect to a changing world.  Nicholson wasn't the only person who capitalized on this motif-Dustin Hoffman, Gene Hackman, and Ryan O'Neal were all mining similar ground at this point to great success.  What sets Five Easy Pieces apart, then, is the ambiguity of the film, particularly its stronger second half.  There are scenes in the movie where you have to heavily understand what the script is giving you hints at.  Look at, say, the clear unrest in Lois Smith's work here-where she's so sexually repressed that she pursues a man she knows won't be good to her, an exact mirror of the relationship she has with every man in the film.  Or the sheer comic ridiculousness of Nicholson "fighting the man" in the form of Lorna Thayer's waitress in the movie's most famous sequence, the "chicken salad scene."  Or the very complicated, manipulative relationship that Rayette and Bobby have with each other, where you know they're destined to end up apart, but the way it happens lets them both find peace in a melancholy way.

The film struggles on occasion, and is hurt in the way that it looks at Bobby's philandering and abuse of Rayette as two-sided, when clearly it's more his fault that their relationship is poisoned.  Both actors received Oscar nominations for the film, and while it's easy to praise Nicholson's work here (the heartbreaking moment with his father, confessing things he's never said out loud to a man he was once terrified of but is now just a blank slate is jaw-dropping), I was mixed with Black's work.  She clearly embodies Rayette, but I feel like we keep going to the same well over-and-over, with the main moment at the end not being the moment we need it to be-she's expected to have not grown outwardly but grown inwardly, but to me she was still the same person at the beginning of the film.  It's easy to mix "good performance" with "I feel bad for her," and I think some of the praise for her work should fall into the latter camp even if people are claiming the former.  Black has some great moments ("I'm not a piece of crap") but her sole Oscar nomination left me mixed, even in a year of very eclectic nominees (I officially have seen all five of this year's nominated films, though I have little memory of Lee Grant in The Landlord).  The film is occasionally dated, but is one of the best of this style of "changing times" films I've seen, and one of Nicholson's most effective performances.  I'm not quite at 5-stars, but it deserves its perch as a "classic."

Looking for a Sixth Decade...

An Oscar nomination is a truly amazing moment in an actor's career.  For many, it's the moment they have dreamt of all of their lives-the culmination of years of work, determination, and a little bit of luck when just the right fates align and nab them their career high point.

And for most Oscar nominees, that's it.  If I remember my statistics right, it's about 65% of all Oscar nominees for acting will only get that one nomination, that one moment in the sun that will be in the first two lines of their obituary.  And that's great-we'll get to all of you in the OVP (or we've already gotten to you, in which case don't get greedy).

But for other actors, that one Oscar nomination is hardly enough, and they want more.  Some of these actors enjoy quick bursts of nominations like Renee Zellweger, Russell Crowe, or (currently) Jennifer Lawrence, but we're going to focus today on people who have managed to sustain decades of Oscar stamina.

It's actually extremely rare to be able to be nominated at least one time in four different decades, and even rarer to pull it off consecutively.  As there seem to be several actors this year who are looking to get a nomination decades away from their last citation, I figured it was time to take a look at this list again.

Before we start, let's go through the people who have passed on and are no longer in the running but hit 4 or 5 decades (as the title alludes to, no one has hit six...and yes, this is a trivia article so if I missed an actor, share in the comments below).

Five Decades in a Row: Laurence Olivier (1930's-70's)
Five Decades Non-Consecutively: Katharine Hepburn (1930's-1980's, no 70's), Paul Newman (1950's-00's, no 70's as well)
Four Decades in a Row: Bette Davis (1930's-60's), Jack Lemmon (1950-80's), Geraldine Page (1950's-80's),
Four Decades Non-Consecutively: Mickey Rooney (1930's-70's, no 60's), Peter O'Toole (1960's-00's, no 90's)...both of whom never won competitive Oscars though they both won Honorary ones

Again, it's a short list, and one that has gotten considerably longer as the stars of the 1960's have stuck around further than was typical with stars of yore.  We'll start out with those actors that are still living and have already hit three decades.

Waiting for the Fourth...

Of the 18 living actors who have been nominated in three separate decades for acting awards (and for the record, the year the film came out is the beginning of the decade-none of this "Google Search Driving Miss Daisy won the 1990 Oscars" crap), some actually have to wait a few more years before they can try again as their third nomination came in the 2010's and they can't get another decade under their belt for a few more years.  Most of these actors did this in the 1990's, 2000's, and 2010's: Brad Pitt, Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett, Leonardo DiCaprio, Matt Damon, Kate Winslet, Julianne Moore, and Annette Bening all have nominations in each of the past three decades (it's worth noting that Bening is the only one of these eight actors who doesn't have an Oscar, (though Damon has his for screenwriting) and is one of only two actors who have hit more than three that is still alive without an Oscar-I'm just saying AMPAS, but keep that in mind in a few years when you're handing out Honoraries and Bening is still empty-handed).  The only non-consecutive actor who has scored this decade would be Sally Field, who took a 28-year gap between her second and third nods, and did this oddly with only three nominations (Lincoln, her most recent nod, is her only loss to date).  And though it's hardly worth listing all of the actors who have two decades behind them, there are a few names in this year's mix that could be headed toward a third decade of dominance (Michelle Pfeiffer and Woody Harrelson both spring to mind).

Of the actors who could jump to four decades this year, most of them don't have films out this year, but none of them are in "retirement."  Weirdly a surprising number of actors actually are ones who skipped at least one decade: Jodie Foster (missing 00's), Sissy Spacek (missing 90's), Ellen Burstyn (missing 90's), and Al Pacino (missing 00's).  While all of these actors continue to work, Foster and Spacek in particular don't appear onscreen very often and it's been years since any of them were in the sort of movie that would garner Oscar's attention.  Still, they're all legends so a random showy role could do the trick if they got back in the game in a major way.

The actors who have consecutive nominations are a bit more likely, in my opinion, to make a jump into a fourth decade.  Both Ben Kingsley and Morgan Freeman continually work in movies, and though I have to admit they both tend to be going for "paycheck roles" more than they should (they seem to be in everything), they work so constantly that a random supporting nomination once more seems probable, if not inevitable.

The three remaining actors, though, actually have films out this year with a lot of potential Oscar buzz.  Toward the top of the list is Holly Hunter, who has a major role in The Big Sick as a mother getting to know her daughter's boyfriend while she's in a coma.  Hunter is getting really solid reviews for the film and could nab her fifth nomination (in a fourth decade) this year if the buzz continues.  While their films haven't come out yet, both Frances McDormand (another five in four) who has a showy lead role in Three Billboards or Tom Hanks who may be in The Papers with Meryl Streep (directed by Steven Spielberg, in a film premise that sounds like it was made in an Oscar bait factory), both could be in the running.  Hanks is strange in the sense that his fourth decade nomination seemed certain with work in Captain Phillips, Saving Mr. Banks, and Bridge of Spies, but Oscar hasn't warmed to him like they have in the past?  Perhaps things will change this year?

Waiting for a Fifth...

Once again, we can start out with six actors who have already scored their 2010's hit and are now just biding their time until they can try again.  Three of these actors have done five decades (shockingly) non-consecutively (which means they very well could have been in the running for six if they'd had a little more luck in a certain year).  Jeff Bridges skipped the 1990's (missing for The Fisher King), Robert Duvall missed in the Aughts (but came damn close for Get Low) and Robert de Niro also missed the Aughts (probably getting closest for Meet the Parents...though admittedly not too close).  The other four actors, though, have hit every decade since the 1980's consecutively: Julia Roberts, Denzel Washington, and Daniel Day-Lewis (all, oddly enough, nominated in 1989), and have already gotten this decade crossed off.  Day-Lewis has notably won in three of those four decades.

Another twelve actors have scored four decades and are on the search for a fifth.  They range from actors who are constantly churning out films to actors who have largely retired from the cinema but are thankfully still kicking.  Though many of these actors scored their nominations consecutively, only one of the dozen is currently on a streak: that would be Diane Keaton, who has scored a nomination every decade since the 1970's (and only one nomination per decade, it's worth pointing out).  Keaton rarely challenges herself since Something's Gotta Give, but she's the sort of actor who bides her time until something brilliant randomly comes along and everyone remembers how much they love her-considering the wave of adoration coming from her recent AFI win, this would be the time to strike if she wanted to go there.

Other working actors that could make it include busy actors such as Jon Voight (who skipped the 1990's despite constantly making movies since his big break in Midnight Cowboy), Shirley MacLaine (who, had she scored for Postcards from the Edge as she was expected to and should have, would be a column down), Vanessa Redgrave (her near-miss campaigns for Atonement and Coriolanus actually mean that she could well have had the record by now!), Dustin Hoffman (who continues to make enough films often enough that he should be able to pull this off in a surprise supporting role at some point, despite missing the Aughts), and of course Dame Maggie Smith (who skipped the 1990's, but came roaring back in the past ten years as a genuine box office draw and nearly won a citation for The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel a couple of years ago).  Hoffman probably has the best shot this year for The Meyerowitz Stories, but it's not entirely clear if it will meet release date eligibility.  I'd imagine that Scott Rudin will force Netflix to meet AMPAS qualifications considering his long history with the body, in which case Hoffman is most definitely a threat, but Netflix seems to want to have it available same day as its digital platform.  We shall see, but by my count the only other one of these actors with a major film in contention this year is Redgrave, who is in Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool, though I can't tell how big her role is.

Other actors who are looking for a fifth don't work as often or are notoriously curmudgeonly about working again.  Joanne Woodward (not nominated since 1990, but extending all the way back to the 1950's with her streak, the earliest nomination for a living person in this article) hasn't appeared in theaters since 1993, and Gene Hackman (who missed for The Royal Tenenbaums due to category confusion, costing him his fifth consecutive citation) is happily retired.  Albert Finney (who missed the 1990's) hates the Oscars and only does bit parts these days, though he's the other actor (aside from Bening) who is living and has hit the 3+ decade counter, so he'd also be a decent contender for an Honorary Award (that he'd never show up for it in a million years).  Warren Beatty did finally make another movie with Rules Don't Apply, but it bombed so horribly I'm kind of scared he'll never make a movie again at this point, and he was already dodgy about making pictures to begin with.  And finally there is Julie Christie, who has resumed working if not necessarily in major cinematic work.  She skipped the 1980's and bizarrely has only received one nomination in each decade she's been cited in (much like Keaton).

Waiting for a Sixth...

As the stats above corroborate, getting a sixth is damn hard work, as there's a reason no one has done it.  Kate Hepburn probably could have had she done more significant film work in the 1970's, but she spent most of that time on the stage, and she's probably the only one who has come close until now.  Three living actors have pulled off five decades in a row, and one in particular seems determined to break yet another of Hepburn's records (not settling for a tie).

Meryl Streep is the only actor who has managed to pull off a 2010's nomination already and have five in a row (ever the showoff, she's managed to land four nods this decade).  Streep, it's worth noting, is also the only actor to have more than one nomination in five different decades (Olivier getting Rebecca made a year too late), a record that may stand for infinity.  Streep will need to continue her current stamina to hit the goal, but at this rate she could well take it in the 2020's (she'll only be in her seventies).

That is if one of the two other living actors don't go for the title first.  Both have received consecutive nominations since the 1960's, and at least one is still working.  Michael Caine, an actor you don't always think of for such lists, got his first nomination in 1966, then got cited in 1972, 1983, 1986, 1999, and 2002, and despite being 81, continues to work constantly (he was well-regarded in the recently Oscar-nominated Youth) and has made no secret about his desire to win a third Oscar for a leading role.  Just one nomination would land him the record, and put Streep in a difficult position-2030 is a long way to go to actually beat this title outright.

The other person is the recently retired Jack Nicholson, who made his last film four years ago and claims he is done with cinema, but rumors persist that he might make one step out-of-retirement to do that English-language Toni Erdmann with Kristin Wiig (they've even go so far as to hire Lena Dunham as the writer).  If that actually happens, all bets are off-it's obviously a movie that AMPAS liked (it was nominated), and Nicholson making one last role would be pretty hearty catnip for the Oscars.

And there you have it folks-a morning's dose of Oscar trivia.  Do you think that Streep, Caine, or Nicholson could take the record?  Who will be the next person to score four or five decades' worth of nominations?  Share in the comments!