Forecasting the Oscars ® since 2003

"It's not about who we want to win,

It's about who will"

ANALYZING THE SUPPORTING CATEGORIES

BAFTA winner Tilda Swinton added depth to an underwritten part in Michael Clayton

FEATURES

By Myles Hughes

I know I’m not the only one who’s noticed that since this year’s Oscar nominees were announced, almost all Oscar-related websites have gone virtually silent. This is a natural part of the process, as there is now less room for speculation. The calm before the storm is somewhat more noticeable thanks to quite a few frontrunners in the major categories (e.g. the Coens, Daniel Day-Lewis, Javier Bardem, etc.)

However, it’s exceedingly rare that there isn’t at least one huge upset, and we have become relatively comfortable with the list of predicted winners thanks to some mostly repetitive precursors. We mustn’t forget that the Oscars have an uncanny ability to surprise us, and perhaps it’s time to re-evaluate just how much of a sure thing some contenders are.

Today I will be examining the supporting acting categories. In alphabetical order, the nominees for Best Supporting Actor are:

CASEY AFFLECK, THE ASSASSINATION OF JESSE JAMES BY THE COWARD ROBERT FORD

Why He Will Win: His is the male breakout performance of the year, and his American nationality might push him past the international frontrunner. He has also been the most consistent through the precursors, next to Bardem of course. His win would certainly be a massive upset, but it’s not outside the realm of possibility.
Why He Won’t Win: Younger actors and newcomers generally don’t fare well in this category, which generally favors veterans and character actors, of which Affleck is neither. Between this role and his excellent lead turn in Gone Baby Gone, however, Casey has now put himself firmly on the map, and this nod will likely push him towards new and lucrative film roles.

JAVIER BARDEM, NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN

Why He Will Win: The indisputable frontrunner for the entire Oscar season, Bardem’s footing has never so much as slipped. His victory at the SAG, as well as an obvious unanimous love for No Country For Old Men and the other guilds and precursors place him in the most ideal position possible. Not to mention that his character has been one of the most memorable of the year, eliciting numerous comparisons to Hannibal Lecter, another Oscar-winning performance.
Why He Won’t Win: Being a foreigner might be a handicap, depending on how nationalist the Academy behaves this year (where most frontrunners aren't american). His character is especially dark, which could prove off-putting to some voters. His age doesn’t quite constitute veteran status, and that could push sentimentality towards Holbrook or even Wilkinson.

PHILIP SEYMOUR HOFFMAN, CHARLIE WILSON’S WAR

Why He Will Win: Three very versatile roles in one year is a feat that doesn’t go unnoticed. Character actors sometimes do well here. More than anything else, the Academy may just want to go way out left field. Because nobody likes a ceremony where the winners are too obvious.
Why He Won’t Win: He already won relatively recently, and to be honest there were several pundits who didn’t even expect him to make the shortlist. He’s not a frontrunner by a long shot, and he’s not a veteran. The nomination in itself is his reward.

HAL HOLBROOK, INTO THE WILD

Why He Will Win: He easily has the veteran card to play here, and if there’s going to be an Alan Arkin-style upset, I feel it will come from here. He is a much beloved older actor who may find that he still has friends among voters (consider that Into The Wild still received plenty of guild nominations, even if Oscar nods were minimal).
Why He Won’t Win: There simply doesn’t seem to be enough love for his movie when compared with Bardem’s to justify such an upset. This means that if he did pull off a win, it would be purely for his work. But the limited screen time hurts, and judging from the nominees, not enough voters saw the movie.

TOM WILKINSON, MICHAEL CLAYTON

Why He Will Win: He too has a veteran card to play, and has been considered due for some time. His work in the film was heralded from the outset, and he quickly became the closest sure thing for a nomination after Bardem.
Why He Won’t Win: He doesn’t have as much clout as Holbrook in this category, and since Holbrook is still lagging behind Bardem, that puts Wilkinson even further back. A victory now seems rather remote.

WINNER: Javier Bardem
ALTERNATE: Hal Holbrook

And the nominees for Best Supporting Actress are:

CATE BLANCHETT, I’M NOT THERE

Why She Will Win: She has tons of respect throughout the industry, and she’s certainly playing more against type than any other performer this year. She’s also the only double nominee for acting this year, a sign that usually implies she is guaranteed at least one win (a la Jamie Foxx in 2004).
Why She Won’t Win: She did win relatively recently, and there is a possibility that, with her wealth of brilliant performances, she may be at a stage where she is taken for granted and passed over for another contender.

RUBY DEE, AMERICAN GANGSTER

Why She Will Win: The victory at SAG has given her a huge boost, and she has the distinction of being the only nominee in this category with a veteran card to play. If she does win, it will definitely be for her career and body of work.
Why She Won’t Win: She shares the same difficulty as Hal Holbrook, which is that they are respected veterans in films that don’t seem to have made a huge impression on the Academy.

SAOIRSE RONAN, ATONEMENT

Why She Will Win: Newcomers have won in this category before (a la Anna Paquin), and her film appears to have enough support from the artistic/tech branches to have scored seven nominations total.
Why She Won’t Win: As the four tops guilds will attest (SAG, PGA, DGA, WGA), the love for Atonement is not unanimous throughout the Academy, and most likely she won’t get enough #1 votes where it counts. Not to worry, however: this nomination is a reward in itself at her age, and her performance here will undoubtedly lead her to more exciting roles.

AMY RYAN, GONE BABY GONE

Why She Will Win: She’s been the critic’s darling this year, and was victorious virtually everywhere but the two biggest precursors: the Golden Globes and the SAG. She gives an unrecognizable, unmistakably authentic performance, of the sort that AMPAS could easily acknowledge.
Why She Won’t Win: She lacks the star power of most of her fellow nominees, and some may consider it too early for her to win just yet. She’s not a name, nor is she really a breakthrough star. Limited screen time and a role that did little to further the overall plot may seal the deal. Obviously she will be doing very well for herself in the future, and could find herself back here before long.

TILDA SWINTON, MICHAEL CLAYTON

Why She Will Win: Hers was the kind of performance that adds depth to an underwritten character, a feat that should not go unnoticed. She’s that kind of character actress that often fares very well in this race, and she could very well be a surprise underdog.
Why She Won’t Win: She is undoubtedly still an underdog at best. Like co-star Wilkinson, she has been a consistent nominee for most of the precursor season, but she is really just category filler for the higher-profile frontrunners. Better luck next year.

WINNER: Cate Blanchett
ALTERNATE: Ruby Dee

Discuss this article in our Blog!

Comments?
 

COMMUNITY

REVIEWS