Showing posts with label Jim Carrey. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Jim Carrey. Show all posts

Wednesday, November 01, 2017

12 Best Actors Without an Oscar Nomination

Okay, here we go!  This isn't going to mean much to you, probably, since it's just another article, but this is the first day of NaNoWriMo for me!  Right now I am probably, frantically, wondering how on earth I am going to write 50,000 words in a month, and fretting about my writerly process, or perhaps (I can occasionally be an optimist) I'm knee-deep in my book, writing to my heart's content because I've spent the past month heartily preparing and am ready for this adventure (I'm writing this on October 7th, so who knows what's happened in the world in the past few weeks).

As a result of this being NaNoWriMo, you're going to be noticing some things might be a little unusual on the blog, namely that I'm not going to be reacting to the events of the day as often as I usually do, and the focus is going to be more on timeless issues (like movies, reviews, OVP, and history) than the events of the day.  Hopefully you don't mind, as this is me trying to do something new and exciting in my life, while also maintaining TMROJ to the best of my abilities.  If there's something truly groundbreaking in the news (something I feel I would be remiss to comment on like a major political/entertainment announcement or where I need to write an obituary), I might come back from my sabbatical early, but otherwise the only current event I'm allowing myself time to discuss on the blog is the election (you'll get a recap of what happened in Virginia, New Jersey, and across the country).  Otherwise, all of these articles will have been written in advance for the next thirty days.

One of the fun things about doing this is that I get to create a lot of lists, as those are the easiest to package in advance, and we're going to start out with a doozy, one that I've been sitting on for a while-the actors that I most think deserve an Academy Award nomination, but for some reason never received one.  This is, bizarrely, a list I've never actually put together on this blog before despite my obsession with the Oscars, and I can't exactly explain why (I've done write-ups about people most "owed" an Oscar, but never my personal tastes).  Perhaps it's because, as I've documented in the past, I don't think there's a lot of actors who really cry out in a major way "why haven't they ever been nominated?!?"  I'm sure there are performers who are giving me side eye right now (if somehow one of them came across this blog), but while it's easy to list actors who have never won an Oscar who should deserved one, most of the major, critically-acclaimed actors at some point in their careers have won at least a nomination.  Even actors who are principally known for commercial work like Doris Day and Harrison Ford wound up in Oscar's good graces during their careers.

It's also because most long lists of actor's who deserved an Oscar nomination in the past end up being written as if there are an unlimited number of nominations in a year-there aren't.  Yes, it's very, very easy to come up with occasional nominations that were undeserved, but those aren't always in the right year to warrant a nomination.  If you're going to call someone out as a "snub," you need to also be willing to get rid of some of the nominees that made it instead, and most writers won't do that.  Frequently on lists like this I see a name like John Cusack, a major movie star who probably, collectively, deserved a nomination at some point, but for what, exactly?  Was John Cusack ever actually one of the five best nominees in a year?  The people below I include because I think they had careers that were/are huge in the motion pictures AND because they have given at least one performance that I'd argue was one of the five best of that year (if not higher), that they would have displaced one of the nominees in my book.  It's genuinely hard for me to find people who fit both of those criteria, but the below twelve are the actors who most make my blood boil when I think about them not having been cited at some point in their careers.  Without further adieu...

12. Jeanne Moreau

Why She Was Never Nominated: With this sole exception, I largely stuck to actors who worked primarily in English-language films, as those are overwhelmingly the ones favored by Oscar.  This list could entirely have been made up just of brilliant actors who didn't work in English-language films that have been amongst the year's bests in the past (Lu Chen, Jean-Paul Belmondo, Toshiro Mifune...).  But considering that Isabelle Huppert finally broke the mold this past year, it seems a shame that Jeanne Moreau, the great French actress, never joined those who had similar crossover appeal and insane talent (Huppert, Catherine Deneuve, Juliette Binoche, Marion Cotillard, Anouk Aimee, Isabelle Adjani) in winning just one dance with Oscar.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Moreau won the BAFTA Award for Viva Villa!, and was nominated for Jules and Jim.  She also took Best Actress at Cannes for Seven Days...Seven Nights, and grabbed the Cesar for The Old Lady Who Walked in the Sea.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: I certainly would buy an argument for La Notte or Bay of Angels, but honestly-how did she not make it for Jules and Jim?  I get that 1962 was a tough year for Best Actress, but I'd probably be willing to displace pretty much anyone for what Moreau accomplishes as Catherine, a careless, cruel, intensely beautiful and magnetic presence in Francois Truffaut's greatest masterpiece (and one of my personal favorite pictures).
Chances in the Future: Moreau died earlier this year, meaning that we'll never get to hear her name while an envelope is announced (and somehow she never took the Governor's Award).

11. Ann Miller

Why She Was Never Nominated: Ann Miller's career has always perplexed me.  Despite talent, beauty, and tap dancing skills that were pretty much unrivaled in Hollywood, she was never really a leading lady.  In fact, I couldn't find a single movie that she was ever the headliner of, which is strange because she wasn't your typical "character actress."  This is perhaps why she was never cited-she didn't play the doting mother or wife in a drama all that often (denying her the ability to be someone like Thelma Ritter or Claire Trevor), instead providing the comic relief in musicals and insane dancing ability.  Perhaps her career was too comical, and she was too shapely, to be taken seriously?
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Other than a spot on the Hollywood Walk of Fame, Miller's only reward was a long tenure in Hollywood.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: Some may go with Miller's most serious role, and the one that she is most well-known for to modern audiences as Coco in Mulholland Drive (she, is, indeed a strange link to the failed dreams of Hollywood in that film), but I'd go with something flat-out marvelous like her work in Kiss Me Kate.  Miller steals the entire movie away from Kathryn Grayson, and is, well, spectacular.
Chances in the Future: Miller passed away in 2004, so we'll never have the opportunity.  Perhaps the best reward is that she is still seen regularly on Turner Classic Movies nearly every month, something some of her leading lady costars can't even claim.  #Revenge?

10. Jim Carrey

Why He Was Never Nominated: Carrey is that classic conundrum of the comedian who has talent, and yet can't make it work with Oscar.  Similarly to others like Danny Kaye or Bob Hope, Carrey went from being a comedic leading man to showing that he had real ability in the late 1990's and early 2000's, but Oscar never seemed interested.  As a result, he's actually the most Golden Globe-nominated film actor EVER to never land an Oscar nomination.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Carrey has been cited for six Golden Globes, winning two back-to-back trophies (he made the wisecrack that he was now "the Tom Hanks of the Golden Globes,"), as well as a BAFTA nomination and a Grammy nomination.  Plus, he had one of the best "Loser Moments" ever when he showed up at the 1998 Oscars after just missing.
When He Should Have Been Nominated: Carrey deserved two nominations (I've never seen Man on the Moon, so quite frankly he might be the most overdue actor, period, if you look at just actual nominations and their collective careers): The Truman Show and Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind.  1998 was admittedly a very good year, and someone worthy was bound to miss, but 2004 wasn't, and there's really no excuse for his losing as Joel Barish-he should have won the damn thing.
Chances in the Future: Probably not.  Carrey isn't an actor that does this sort of work anymore-quite frankly.  He kind of stopped working in major movies after he bad-mouthed Kick-Ass 2 publicly (he did have a hit the following year, but that was already in the can at that point, and was a sequel to one of his biggest pictures).  His interviews have grown increasingly erratic in recent years, as has his off-screen behavior, and at this point even an Honorary Oscar would be a surprise.

9. Meg Ryan

Why She Was Never Nominated: Ryan never had quite the luck that her fellow 90's "America's Sweethearts" did with Oscar (Julia Roberts & Sandra Bullock both of course have their own statues). This is a pity as Ryan is a superb actress and arguably starred in the best actual films during her heyday as a Rom-Com queen.  That said, she couldn't land it for her dramatic turn in Courage Under Fire, and her career got destroyed after she was caught cheating on Dennis Quaid with Russell Crowe (sexism of course rears its ugly head here, as Crowe went on to become a major movie star and an Oscar-winner in the wake of such publicity).  Since then, she's never really landed a major role and has largely disappeared from Hollywood, particularly after The Women was universally-panned (though it did better than you remember at the Box Office).
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Ryan picked up a trio of Golden Globe nominations for her rom-com triumvirate When Harry Met Sally, Sleepless in Seattle, and You've Got Mail.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: The critic in me wants to say When Harry Met Sally, perhaps her breeziest performance, but the ardent fan in me will stick to one of my all-time favorite movies Sleepless in Seattle.  Her Annie is wonderfully-felt, charming, lived-in, lonely, heartbreaking, relatable, and layered-it's one of my favorite romantic performances, and I literally watch it every year at Christmas.  That she couldn't make it for either is a crime.
Chances in the Future: Doubtful-she's not famous enough anymore to get an Honorary Oscar, and she hardly works at all.  She seems to want to move into direction-maybe she'll have a knack for that?  It is how Clint Eastwood, Kevin Costner, and Mel Gibson finally started getting nominated after being skipped over for commercial acting fare.

8. Joseph Cotten

Why He Was Never Nominated: Cotten was that leading man who never really caught on as an icon, despite starring in some of the biggest films of all-time, and being a favorite of two of Hollywood's best directors (Orson Welles and Alfred Hitchcock).  This wasn't for a lack of talent, though, as Cotten always delivered with his characters, bringing forward complicated men who blurred the line between righteous & sinister.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Like Ann Miller, he got a spot on the Walk of Fame, but really that was it for this leading man, whose greatest trophy might be the place that Citizen Kane ended up taking in the history of the movies (not many people get to have second billing on the "greatest film of all-time").
When He Should Have Been Nominated: Citizen Kane is a perfect movie, truly one of the cinema's greatest, but Cotten's performance there isn't why he should have been nominated.  Instead, he should have been cited for his work in The Third Man, an achievement also over-shadowed by Welles (who should have made Supporting Actor that year), but Cotten himself is marvelous as the complicated, slow-march-into-hell man at the center of Harry Lime's plot.
Chances in the Future: Cotten passed away in 1994, leaving behind a laundry list of great film credits but no Oscar.

7. Oscar Isaac

Why He Was Never Nominated: His performances have so far been the right kind, wrong picture.  Isaac is emerging onto the stage of superstardom with the Star Wars franchise giving him the kind of exposure that turned Harrison Ford from a player in low-budget movies decades ago into an action superstar.  Isaac, though, seems to care a lot more about arthouse fare than Ford ever appeared to, starring in complicated movies like Inside Llewyn Davis, A Most Violent Year, and Ex Machina.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Picked up a Golden Globe for Show Me a Hero, as well as a second nomination for Llewyn Davis.  He's also won the position as my future husband, truly the greatest prize of all.
When He Should Have Been Nominated: I genuinely would have nominated him for all three of those performances.  Honestly-Isaac is such a good and exciting actor it's staggering to me he hasn't gotten more traction yet; the only reason he's not higher on this list is that he's so new to the public consciousness & that I'm sure he'll make it eventually, so I'm less perturbed than I am for the next six.  I think his best performance may well have been Ex Machina, a movie that seems destined to gain stature as the years go by, it's like a cross between Elon Musk and John Huston in Chinatown.
Chances in the Future: Solid.  Isaac is too good of an actor and working too often to stay off of Oscar's shortlist for a long.  The better question is, though, whether he is cited for work as good as what he's done before now (ala Michael Fassbender) or is eventually cited for a performance that's not nearly as fascinating (ala Andrew Garfield).

6. Peter Lorre

Why He Was Never Nominated: Lorre's that strange supporting player who never really took off in the supporting categories.  His best shot may have arguably been for his work with Humphrey Bogart in classics like The Maltese Falcon, but for some reason noir was very hit-or-miss when it came to actual acting nominations (Bogart himself was never even nominated for his work in one of these films), and his star in the 1930's wasn't strong enough to grab the Academy's attention during its formative years.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Aside from his Walk of Fame star (a gimme for major actors of his generation), Lorre's only other public honor was being nominated for the Golden Lion at Venice, but this was a director, not an actor.
When He Should Have Been Nominated: I would have cited Lorre for The Maltese Falcon, as his work as Joel Cairo was spectacular, and considering the film's Best Picture nomination, he should have joined costar Sydney Greenstreet as a nominee.  But Lorre's best performance was one of his first, as a child killer in M, a seismic achievement in acting and one of the most powerful performances of the 1930's.
Chances in the Future: Lorre died in 1964, leaving behind several film classics, the largest of being his small role as Ugarte in Casablanca.

5. Scarlett Johansson

Why She Was Never Nominated: Some of the actors on this list I'm postulating as to why they were never nominated, and would invite those who are more associated with these actors' past Oscar campaigns to weigh in, but here's a case where I'm old enough to remember why Johansson missed, and it was greed.  In 2003, ScarJo had two major roles competing for Best Actress (Girl with a Pearl Earring and Lost in Translation), and while it seemed probable that the surging LiT was the better shot at a nomination, the studios didn't want to get into each other's way and so they commit massive category fraud moving her to supporting in LiT, likely killing her traction in the race and leaving room for surprise nominees Samantha Morton and Keisha Castle-Hughes instead.  Had they just stuck with a lead campaign, I think her work for Sofia Coppola probably would have snuck her in in one of the most bizarre Best Actress fields I remember seeing.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Johansson has yet to score with Oscar, but she's a favorite of the HFPA, boasting four nominations at the Golden Globes.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: Her work in Lost in Translation remains, in my opinion, her best, and better than most of the nominees that year (and I'd even argue, the winner).  I also would have cited her for Under the Skin, a film that was never going to catch on with Oscar but was proof that a decade of lounging in bad rom-com's and action flicks didn't dim her star when it came to acting talent.
Chances in the Future: If she's going to get it, it's going to have to be soon.  She's a major star, obviously, but she's 33 now and while that's not an acting death knell for Oscar, it is a time when you need to start making your move on a trophy.  I still think she makes it at some point though-she feels too famous not to land at least once.

4. Myrna Loy

Why She Was Never Nominated: Loy's best performances were always light comedy, and she made them look incredibly easy.  While the early Academy wasn't nearly as allergic to comedy as later generations of voters, they still had a propensity to favor melodrama, which wasn't Loy's strong suit (even her best dramatic performance, in The Best Years of Our Lives, is arguably the 4th or 5th best performance in that movie).  Even so, it's a pity that one of the finest performers of the 1930's never joined women like Carole Lombard or Jean Arthur with at least one nomination.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Loy actually does have an Oscar even if she never won a nomination, due to an Honorary trophy she won at the 63rd Academy Awards.  Her victory was actually a result over an uproar when Sophia Loren, who already had a trophy, picked up a statue despite numerous longtime performers like Myrna Loy who had never won an Oscar.  The Academy agreed with those complaining and gave them both statues.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: It seems truly bizarre to me, even in a year where Best Actress was pretty competitive (just ask Bette Davis!) that Loy couldn't get in for her pitch-perfect work in The Thin Man while her leading man William Powell was included.  This would have been the perfect moment to cite her gifts.
Chances in the Future: Thankfully Loy won as a result of that petition, as she would die just two years later.

3. Edward G. Robinson

Why He Was Never Nominated: For the most part, Robinson's career as a leading man wasn't in the sorts of films that won Oscars, but instead just made oodles of money.  Though longtime player as a tough-guy gangster in pictures like Little Caesar and Kid Galahad, he was apparently a kind and sensitive man off-screen (who fell victim to the McCarthy-era political climate when he was forced to name names before HUAC), his tough guy exterior and the public demand for it meant that he only occasionally did the sort of movies that AMPAS loves, even though he was always a deeply-talented actor.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Robinson won an Honorary Oscar in 1973 for his lifetime of movie-making, as well as the SAG Life Achievement Award in 1970.  He also won the Best Actor prize from both the National Board of Review (for Tales of Manhattan) and the Cannes Best Actor prize (for House of Strangers).
When She Should Have Been Nominated: Robinson not being nominated for his spectacular work in Double Indemnity is, in my opinion, one of the biggest snubs in Supporting Actor Oscar history.  It would have been such a fine time to honor a man who had made most of Hollywood rich, and it's easily his best performance.  A crime.
Chances in the Future: Robinson sadly died in 1973, two months before he was able to win his Academy Award.


2. Mia Farrow

Why She Was Never Nominated: Mia Farrow's lack of a nomination is more perplexing than literally any other person on this list.  It's hard to understand right now (Farrow has become synonymous with her ex-partner Woody Allen and their decades-long public feud more than her actual career as a performer at this point), but Farrow was a major star in Hollywood for decades, and starred in a number of classic pictures.  Plus, Allen has a gift for getting actresses nominated for an Oscar like few others, and Farrow has starred in more of Woody's movies than literally any other actor (and she was the lead in most of them).  All-in-all, I have no explanation other than bad luck.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Farrow won the Golden Globe for Best Newcomer in 1965, and during her career would win 9 nominations from the HFPA, five of which were for individual film performances.  She was also nominated for the BAFTA three times.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: This is where I have to admit that I'm not as familiar with Allen's filmography during the Mia Years as I am pre and post that time period (it's an issue I'm hoping to rectify), though I've heard The Purple Rose of Cairo and Broadway Danny Rose are the standouts.  What I CAN vouch for is that Farrow surely deserved a nomination for her brilliant work in Rosemary's Baby, which even in the standout 1968 lineup deserved mention.
Chances in the Future: Doubtful.  Farrow would make a worthy recipient of the Honorary Oscar or the Jean Hersholt, but Hollywood seems to want to forget the entire Woody/Mia feud, and unlike Woody, Mia would probably show up to grab her Oscar and remind them of it.

1. Rita Hayworth

Why She Was Never Nominated: How do you pick the most Oscar-worthy actor ever who's never won a nomination?  Simple-you pick a woman who deserved two trophies and yet wasn't nominated for any.  Hayworth was insanely beautiful and took on glam-doll roles, but Oscar has proven in the past to be fine with giving beautiful women Academy Awards without issue.  Why it was that Hayworth, a box office star who regularly worked with serious directors, couldn't get this nomination is beyond me.
Award-Worthy in Other Ways: Hayworth would be named one of the 25 Greatest Actresses of All-Time by the American Film Institute (a posthumous honor, but still), and would be nominated for the Golden Globe one time, for the dramatic western Circus World with John Wayne & Claudia Cardinale.
When She Should Have Been Nominated: 1946 and 1947.  I admittedly still have a few performances before I say this officially (and YEARS until we tackle these in the OVP, unfortunately), but I feel absolutely confident that Hayworth would have gotten nominations from me for Gilda and The Lady from Shanghai, polar opposite roles that bring out her best traits as an actress.  Give or take Celia Johnson in Brief Encounter and Gloria Grahame in Crossfire, they may well be the best performances given by a woman in either of those years, regardless of category. That she missed for both-I just can't stand it.
Chances in the Future: Hayworth died in 1987 at the sadly young age of 67.

Those are my list-how about yours?  I know you have quibbles or people you can throw "but what about..." at me, so let's have it.  And which of these do you think was the biggest snub or has the best shot in the future (my money's on Oscar Isaac)?  Share below!

Friday, September 26, 2014

Ranting On...Sawyer Hartman and the Art of the Celebrity Career Change

Sawyer Hartman
There's been so much swirl this week in the YouTube community that I figured my Friday rant had to be in regard to this universe.  The obvious person to write about would be Sam Pepper, as Pepper's video pinching women's buttocks "as a prank" has crossed over into the mainstream media, and he is starting to lose sponsorship deals, and internet personalities such as Laci Green and Tyler Oakley have called for a backlash against Pepper.  However, Pepper's acts are straight-forward idiotic, and anyone who thinks otherwise is not paying attention-he spent an entire video molesting unsuspecting women, if you cannot understand that that is wrong you clearly need to pay more attention.

So instead I'm going to write about one of the below-the-line stories of the past week, that of Sawyer Hartman's "Moving On: A New Chapter" video, because it has far more grey area surrounding it.  Sawyer Hartman is probably not a name that a lot of you know, particularly if you're not a YouTuber, so I feel I should probably give a teensy bit of a background.  Hartman is a 24-year-old aspiring actor, one who frequently collaborates with people like Tyler Oakley and Joey Graceffa, and who is noted for a number of videos, but frequently his drunken spelling bees and his Ask Sawyer videos.  He's admittedly not one of my favorite YouTubers, even though I do subscribe to him (mostly because he collaborates with a lot of people I like, so I end up seeing a number of his videos as a result).  However, I've seen enough of his videos both in collabs and solos to have a decent idea of his schtick.

Hartman's video, which I'll link right here, discusses his frustration with where his channel has gone.  He states that he's a "filmmaker" and that he's tired of making videos that he finds uninspired just for the sake of creating content on his site.  He wants to focus on making films, which is his passion.  As a result, he'll only be focusing on making films (...actually, he's pretty unclear on this front-he makes it sound more like he'll make films or just talking to the camera videos, which seems to basically imply that he's just skipping the Drunken Spelling Bee-style collaborations) on his channel from now on, but says that he'll go back to making films every Wednesday.

Jim Carrey
You might be thinking this is pretty innocuous, and why am I discussing this when we're fighting on multiple international fronts and polling out of the Alaska Senate race means that Mark Pryor, not Mark Begich may have to be the saving grace for the Democratic Party in November if they can find one at all?  But there's a couple of larger points here that affect more than just Hartman that I find intriguing and worth discussing.  The first is how direct and expositional Hartman is being here.  The best comparison is to look at, say, a popular actor like Jim Carrey.  Carrey was one of the top actors of the 1990's, and made an enormous string of hits during that time period: Dumb & Dumber, The Mask, the Ace Ventura films, Liar Liar-a series of silly, pretty stupid, but insanely successful comedic films.  As a result, Carrey had a large enough star to take his career in a slightly different direction.  He followed up these films with more dramatic and "actorly" roles in The Truman Show and Man on the Moon, which ended up being a strong career move; the roles won Carrey critical acclaim (though bizarrely no Oscar nominations), and instilled a different persona for him in the public's eye.  In the coming decade, he'd do a pretty decent job of balancing his career between the comedic films that his core audience loved (The Grinch, Bruce Almighty, the upcoming Dumb and Dumber To) while frequently doing more dramatic or artsy fare (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, I Love You Phillip Morris).  It was a smart, pretty seamless career shift for Carrey, and is very similar to what Hartman is doing, though on a slightly less public scale.

However, Carrey was smart about his choices in a way that Hartman doesn't appear to be.  For starters, you don't discuss your career changes with your core audience.  Your core audience is not your therapist, and this is particularly true if they are used to a "character" that you've been putting forward.  Your core audience is the way that you earn a living.  Hartman may be an aspiring actor and filmmaker, but his greatest gift to casting directors and potential producers wanting to fund his projects is that he has this base audience that wants to follow him everywhere.  That's how business (particularly show business) works-people hire you and pay you more money and are willing to take chances on you because you have a net base of fans that will follow you on a less proven path.  This is certainly the case with Carrey-he wouldn't have been able to land The Truman Show if he wasn't already a major Box Office draw-the producers would have wanted someone like Tom Hanks who had a stronger track record with both comedy and drama.  However, Carrey was a successful enough star that they were willing to take the risk because they knew his fans would follow him outside his filmic comfort zone.  If Carrey had stated he would no longer be making comedic or slapstick pictures, his fans might have been turned off by an actor who didn't seem to appreciate the success he had been given.  This is the way that Hartman is coming across in his video, where he's proclaiming "I'm an artist" and instead of putting original films alongside his more popular drunken videos (he in fact chastises fans of them), he simply decides to cut the audience off cold turkey, and that's a pretty decent reason to click unsubscribe, which is the absolute last thing that Hartman wants.

This admittedly isn't just a problem that Hartman has experienced.  YouTubers like Shane Dawson, Joey Graceffa, and JacksGap have all encountered situations where they clearly want to get out of the "talk to the camera, how cute am I?" sort of approach to their careers, but there's a slight problem here-as a whole, they are not particularly good at these new films.  Dawson's original content frequently has to rely on his past work, and it's only particularly successful when it involves him relying on his Shane Dawson persona (his best and funniest videos are typically his musical parodies, which are a combination of Shane goofiness and using other people's content for inspiration).  His forays outside of this world have been far less successful, and the reviews of his latest film Not Cool, his first full-length feature film, have been embarrassingly bad-the sorts of things that you'd expect from a Raspberry Award winner, except those films usually get better reviews.  Joey Graceffa and Shane Hartman's scripted material seems stagy and under-produced.  There's none of the fun that someone like, say the Brothers Riedell can bring to their productions (one of the gold standards amongst YouTube original content producers).  JacksGap is in a bizarre situation where some of his films (all documentaries so far) are actually quite fetching-the camera work is very strong, and there's a clear direction to what he's doing.  The problem I have with Jack Harries' direction isn't that he's changed what he's doing, but he isn't following Carrey's plan of mixing some of the old with the new to ween off the audience.  No longer do we get any conversational videos with Harries about his life, but instead just original content and discussions of his work.  This is clearly on-purpose, and may pay off in the end (Harries isn't foolish enough to not keep himself in front of the camera, as his uncanny handsomeness is the main draw here, at least at this point still), but it's a bit risky since cold turkey is a way to alienate more casual fans.

The last thing I have a problem with with Hartman's confessional is more a problem that I have with this sort of thing in general.  It's incredibly important to have someone to talk to that you can express your doubts about your life and career and where you want it to head next.  That is vital, in fact, but it's vital not just because it's generally a good idea but because it gives you a way to gage reactions before you actually have to go in and ask for a promotion or decide to break-up with (or propose to) your significant other.  However, this person should be a therapist or a best friend or your younger brother or your parents-you shouldn't be testing your message to your actual intended audience (in case you missed it in The Wizard of Oz, you don't want people to pay attention to the man behind the curtain).  Furthermore, Hartman's video is more about attention than actually getting advice, and that's something I have no tolerance for.  We talked about this over here so click if you're interested, but there's no point to complaining or whining without a purpose, and that's what Hartman is doing here.  I hate it when people complain about a problem, but aren't clearly trying to do something to rectify the problem.  Hartman has almost two million followers, but they aren't responsible for him making videos and for keeping their interest-he is.  There are thousands of aspiring actors who would kill for the kind of exposure he experiences and the platform he has created for himself (and yes, he created it-no one forced him to pursue celebrity at the risk of hurting his artistic aspirations down-the-line).  He doesn't need to go out on his YouTube channel complaining about how he doesn't feel like a filmmaker anymore, and he's not sure what he's doing.  That's a complaint for your therapist's office, not for the people who make it possible for you to actual become a filmmaker.  They should be seeing the films that you want to make, the art that you want to put out in the world, not your complaints about how that art is not happening.  If you want to be something (whether that's a filmmaker, a writer, a chef, or any number of things), if all you're doing is planning it in your head and not just going out and doing it, then there's your problem and just get out there and do it.  But don't do it by biting off and discarding the hand that feeds you.

Monday, May 06, 2013

Golden Globe Nominations ≠ Oscar Nominations, Part 1



The above statement should be obvious to anyone who follows the awards season with even a hint of regularity.  After all, there are ten lead performances nominated each year at the Golden Globes while there are only five at the Oscars, and at least one supporting performance almost always gets skipped in favor of a different performer at the Oscars.

However, I recently undertook a project (ie I was bored while watching Big Bang Theory reruns) and decided to list out all of the cinematic performances that the Golden Globes have honored through the years that didn't get a subsequent Oscar nomination (for the sake of my sanity, I stuck to the six modern film acting categories, and not to the "Best New Star" awards of yesteryear).

What I found was really interesting.  While it is a frequent occurrence where a performer is favored by the Globes, sometimes getting 6-7 more nominations from the HFPA than the Oscars, it is extremely rare for someone to rack up multiple Golden Globe nominations without also getting at least one Oscar nomination.  In fact, only eight performers have been nominated for four or more Golden Globe awards without winning at least one Oscar citation.

This smelled like a list to me, and so I'll be listing out the ten performers that have received the most film Golden Globe nods without also getting an Oscar nomination.  In order to break ties, I gave three points to a lead-drama, two to a supporting performance, and one for a comedic lead performance (and winning a trophy broke the tie after that).  Later this week, we'll investigate the far more frequent list of performers who have received at least one Oscar nod, but considerably more Globe nominations.

Honorable Mentions: Thanks to my tie-breaking, some three-time nominees got left out, ranging from classic movie stars like Tony Randall and Glenn Ford to modern stars like Jamie Lee Curtis and Hugh Grant.

10. Emily Blunt (Tie)
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Supporting Actress-2006 (The Devil Wears Prada)
  • Best Actress (Drama)-2009 (The Young Victoria)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-2012 (Salmon Fishing in the Yemen)
Got the Closest On: This is arguable between Prada and Victoria, but I have to assume considering its awards haul in 2009 that it was The Young Victoria, when her best shot was taking out Helen Mirren.
Reasons She Missed: Yes, this is a good illustrator of how rare this is for a performer to miss on multiple Globe nominations.  Emily Blunt, with only three quick nominations before she turned thirty, is now in the top ten.  While Salmon appears to be a throwaway nomination in a rather weak year for comedies, the other two were at least part of the conversation.  I wasn't super-impressed with Blunt in The Young Victoria, but considering Oscar's preference for younger actresses, it's a bit odd that Helen Mirren got so much traction in 2009 (especially considering her recent win).  Blunt also had a shot with Devil, but she was not well-known then and it was going to be tough to throw out the scene-stealing Abigail Breslin (the performer who missed with the HFPA).

10. Donald Sutherland (Tie)
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1970 (MASH)
  • Best Actor (Drama)-1980 (Ordinary People)
  • Best Supporting Actor-1998 (Without Limits)
Got the Closest On: For certain it was Ordinary People, a truly bizarre on-paper snub.
Reasons He Missed: I can explain the Without Limits miss (the Globes have always liked Sutherland, and occasionally throw a star a bone even if their film tanked), and MASH (comedy always has a tough time, even with a film as iconic as Altman's), but the Ordinary People snub is weird.  Yes, he's overshadowed by Hutton and Moore, but this film was universally adored by the Academy, and he's the only major cast member to not pick up a nomination.  Instead, the Oscars went with one of the actors they consistently like better than the Globes, Robert Duvall (in The Great Santini).

9. Raul Julia
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Supporting Actor-1982 (Tempest)
  • Best Actor (Drama)-1985 (Kiss of the Spider Woman)
  • Best Supporting Actor-1988 (Moon Over Parador)
Got the Closest On: My gut is telling me that Tempest might have been the closest.
Reasons He Missed: Julia is now a largely forgotten actor, cut down in his prime, and is known to most movie audiences as Gomez Addams in the big screen versions of The Addams Family series.  Julia, however, had a strong run in the 1980's in cinema.  His 1982 snub was due to a combination of Oscar's love of men in drag (John Lithgow) and Robert Preston moving from lead to supporting from the Golden Globes to the Oscars, therefore securing a nomination for Victor/VictoriaKiss of the Spider Woman would have almost certainly marketed Julia as supporting nowadways (category fraud is more prevalent now), and he probably could have taken out William Hickey or Robert Loggia.  His final nomination came in a weird year for the Supporting Actor race, and since I know little of this race, I cannot tell if he was near a nomination or whether this was a Globe-honoring-a-favorite sort of citation.  If one of our awards show aficionados would like to shed some light on that race, I'd appreciate it.

8. Danny Kaye
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1951 (On the Riviera)-Won the Golden Globe
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1952 (Hans Christian Andersen)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1956 (The Court Jester)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1958 (Me and the Colonel)-Won the Golden Globe
Got the Closest On: Not sure...probably none of them.
Reasons He Missed: Kaye is cheating a bit to include, as he did pick up a pair of Honorary Academy Awards, but I did want to acknowledge him, as he's one of the rare performers to have gotten four nominations in the Comedy category without ever getting cited for Drama.  The Court Jester is by far his best-known of these four films, but part of me thinks that he wasn't close for any of these.  Again, I'd love some discussion on this post, so share away in the comments if you have thoughts.

7. Carol Burnett
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1972 (Pete n Tillie)
  • Best Supporting Actress-1978 (A Wedding)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1981 (The Four Seasons)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1982 (Annie)
Got the Closest On: I'm going with Pete 'n' Tillie over A Wedding.  I'll get to why below.
Reasons She Missed: I kind of wish it was the 1970's again so I could get a gage of how big of a star Carol Burnett was at the time.  She could sell out Broadway, Carnegie Hall, had a top-rated TV series, and was regularly working in motion pictures.  She landed a couple of late-in-the-game nominations at the Globes (including for the ill-fated big-screen version of Annie), but her best shots were her first two nominations.  1972 was a strong and wild year for Best Actress (I love that Joanne Woodward got nominated for a film called The Effect of Gamma Rays on Man-in-the-Moon Marigolds), and Burnett, along with Goldie Hawn in Butterflies are Free were probably on the hunt for a nomination against Maggie Smith in Travels with My Aunt.  Smith also potentially cost her a nomination in 1978, when she and Penelope Milford both managed nominations without being first cited by the Globes, but it's hard to feel bad for Burnett that year when you compare her to Mona Washbourne, a woman who has probably more precursors than anyone ever to not also win an Oscar nomination.  Washbourne's performance in Stevie won the NYFCC, LAFCA, National Board of Review, and Boston critics prizes, as well as Globe and BAFTA nominations, but due to a weird release schedule managed to miss at the Oscars.


6. Cameron Diaz
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1998 (There's Something About Mary)
  • Best Supporting Actress-1999 (Being John Malkovich)
  • Best Supporting Actress-2001 (Vanilla Sky)
  • Best Supporting Actress-2002 (Gangs of New York)
Got the Closest On: My guess is that it was Being John Malkovich, where she was basically guaranteed as the sixth place position.
Reasons She Missed: Some people just have bad luck.  Diaz was surprisingly close in 1998, but the Academy was still smitten with Emily Watson (and felt the need to skip Susan Sarandon after honoring her three years earlier).  1999 was a year with six names in the mix, and hers was the one that got cut (though she did score SAG and BAFTA nominations, so you have to know she was damn close).  In 2001, the field was thrown asunder after the SAG Awards threw names like Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett, and Dakota Fanning into the mix, and then the Oscars went with the Globe nominees almost verbatim (except that they nominated six people, and Diaz was once again cut).  Finally, there was Gangs of New York, which was a throwaway star-loving nomination by the Globes, and it was likely Michelle Pfeiffer who was tousling with Queen Latifah for the final nomination, not Diaz.

5. Richard Gere
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actor (Drama)-1982 (An Officer and a Gentleman)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1990 (Pretty Woman)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-2002 (Chicago)-Won the Golden Globe
  • Best Actor (Drama)-2012 (Arbitrage)
Got the Closest On: Most certainly Chicago, where he was definitely the sixth place, and kind of stunningly not the fifth place.
Reasons He Missed: With the exception of Chicago, he likely never had a shot.  Officer was a hit with the Oscars, but the Academy doesn't seem to favor romantic male leads.  Pretty Woman was the sort of easy nomination that happens when you're in a hit romantic comedy.  And Arbitrage is the sort of nomination that happens in the rare year where one of the Comedy/Musical nominees (in this case, two) is certain to be nominated for the Oscar.  Chicago, however, was at first a rather odd fit for Oscar, but after the Globe win and the surprise SAG nomination, it looked like Gere would be able to make it and get the fifth slot, but the Oscars love them some Michael Caine, and so Gere just missed his shot (perhaps his only shot-he seems like the sort of actor who never makes it, doesn't he?).


4. Scarlett Johansson
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-2003 (Lost in Translation)
  • Best Actress (Drama)-2003 (Girl with a Pearl Earring)
  • Best Actress (Drama)-2004 (A Love Song for Bobby Long)
  • Best Supporting Actress-2005 (Match Point)
Got the Closest On: Lost in Translation, though 2003 in general seemed like her best shot.
Reasons She Missed: Yes, ScarJo is technically the fourth most snubbed Globe nominee of all time, which seems weird because she picked up these four nominations over the course of three years.  It's hard to believe that she didn't get a nomination in 2003, and it was mostly because someone (the studio, her publicist, or perhaps ScarJo herself) decided to get greedy and campaign her for both films, and then tried to have it all by committing category fraud that the Academy just couldn't back by going supporting with Lost in Translation.  Considering the randomness of the Best Actress category that year, I suspect a unified front would have gotten her over Samantha Morton or Keisha Castle-Hughes.

3. Steve Martin
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1981 (Pennies From Heaven)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1984 (All of Me)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1987 (Roxanne)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1989 (Parenthood)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1995 (Father of the Bride, Part II)
Got the Closest On: All of Me, where he managed to also win the NYFCC Best Actor trophy, but was one one of only two men in the past thirty years to not win an Oscar nomination after taking the top prize at the NYFCC honors.
Reasons He Missed: Father of the Bride Part II aside, one could make the argument that any of these was within the reach of Oscar, but just couldn't quite make it.  Martin was the rage in the 1980's, hailed as a comedic genius, but unlike some of his high-flying contemporaries (Robin Williams, Eddie Murphy, Whoopi Goldberg), he didn't go dramatic to grab his Oscar nomination.  At this point, I think there's still room for him to do it if he wanted to (he's still well-liked in the film community), but he's lost that edge that his films in the 1980's had, and I doubt he'll be able to make it without going with a sentimental, dramatic supporting turn.  His best shot was besting Albert Finney in Under the Volcano in 1984, but the loss at the Golden Globes coupled with Finney's continued losing streak probably kept him out of the competition.


2. Mia Farrow
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actress (Drama)-1968 (Rosemary's Baby)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1969 (John and Mary)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1984 (Broadway Danny Rose)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1985 (The Purple Rose of Cairo)
  • Best Actress (Comedy/Musical)-1990 (Alice)
Got the Closest On: Oddly enough, her first shot was probably the best, and had the Oscars known the legendary Farrow was going to have the career she would have, they probably would have picked her over Vanessa Redgrave in Isadora.
Reasons She Missed: I don't have a clue.  It's hard to believe that Rosemary's Baby, one of the great horror films and one of the few to gain the Academy's favor, didn't garner her a nomination (perhaps she was too known as a tabloid fixture at the time, considering she divorced Frank Sinatra that year).  The weirder thing is that, considering she made thirteen films with Woody Allen through the years, she somehow missed out on being one of the sixteen actors who received nominations for Allen films.  At this point, she rarely acts and doesn't have Woody to push her to a nomination, and so probably will never get nominated, but she had quite a run.


1. Jim Carrey
Golden Globe Nominations:
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1994 (The Mask)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1997 (Liar Liar)
  • Best Actor (Drama)-1998 (The Truman Show)-Won the Golden Globe
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-1999 (Man on the Moon)-Won the Golden Globe
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-2000 (How the Grinch Stole Christmas)
  • Best Actor (Comedy/Musical)-2004 (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind)
Got the Closest On: The Truman Show, for sure.  Carrey's miss at the Oscars was the first time in 33 years that the winner in the Drama race couldn't parlay that into a nomination (and fifteen years later, it hasn't happened since).
Reasons He Missed: One could make the argument that Farrow deserves the top slot, since she arguably had a shot for all five of her films, but based on sheer numbers, Carrey earns this.  While three of his nominations (The Mask, Liar Liar, and The Grinch) were the sort that randomly show up at the Globes, the other three all garnered Oscar's notice, but not a nomination.  Man on the Moon had to have been darn close, but Matt Damon's Tom Ripley was probably the sixth place trying to take out Sean Penn, not Carrey.  In 2004, there wasn't actually a strong shot that Carrey would win for his Joel Barish, even though he was better than anyone that actually got nominated.  However, 1998 is unforgivable for the Academy.  Somehow The Truman Show managed to score nominations for Director, Screenplay, and Supporting Actor, but Carrey couldn't get in over Edward Norton (I know Carrey blamed Benigni, but it was Norton that was in fifth place).

And those are the Top 10.  Julia and Kaye are obviously never going to have this rectified, but what are your thoughts on which of the remaining nine could actually pull off a nomination (my bet's on Blunt and possibly Johansson, but what's your guess)?