Review of Oscar Nominees 2015: Best Supporting Actor

Robert Duvall

Age: 84
Film:  The Judge
Role:  Judge Joseph Palmer, a big man in a small town who finds himself accused of murder after a hit-and-run accident that he claims he can’t recall.  Fortunately, Palmer’s son Hank is a successful big city defense attorney.  Unfortunately, Hank hasn’t been home in years.  He and his father have been bitterly estranged after the ramifications of a past accident quickly spiraled out of control.  Their relationship is pretty damaged, and both men are incredibly stubborn.

Nomination History:
Won Best Actor Oscar in 1984 for Tender Mercies (1983).

Previously nominated for Best Actor for The Great Santini (1979) and The Apostle (1997).
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Godfather, Part II (1972), Apocalypse Now (1979), and A Civil Action (1998).

Why He Should Win
Robert Duvall does great work in The Judge.  While the movie itself is disappointingly mediocre, the part is fantastic, particularly when given to a veteran actor of Duvall’s caliber.

For me, the film’s most conspicuously excellent moment comes when Hank (Robert Downey, Jr.) finds his father in distress in the bathroom.  There’s something very raw and genuine and moving about this scene.  Playing someone in such a diminished, distressed physical condition requires an actor to show a level of vulnerability that can’t be comfortable.  Duvall deftly manages to convey a strong man in a moment of helpless weakness, and at the same time, he and his son seem to connect in a positive way on a very primal level (despite their usual antagonist dynamic).

Duvall is excellent throughout the film, sometimes loud and blustery, sometimes cold and sardonic, sometimes severe and stoic, kind and gentle with his granddaughter.  His character is consistently well played and by far the greatest strength of the movie.

Why He Might Not Win
First of all, J.K. Simmons is going to win.  He won the Globe and the SAG and a slew of critics’ awards.  J.K. Simmons deserves to win.  And if for some reason Simmons doesn’t win, then next in line ought to be Edward Norton.

Robert Duvall is (and has always been) a great actor, but I don’t think this is his year.  I think if they were going to give him the Oscar as a kind of lifetime achievement award, that vibe would have been in the air long before now.  (Yes Alan Arkin beat Eddie Murphy in a shocking upset, but I don’t think anybody was quite as shocked about that as Murphy, who seemed to take it personally and probably should have.)  Simmons has been very gracious about his wins so far, and Duvall has won before.  It’s not like his accomplished career has gone unnoticed.

To be blunt, though Duvall gives a captivating performance in a meaty, plum role, The Judge is really not a great movie.  I’m not even sure that I’d feel comfortable calling it a good movie.  For some reason, its trailers underwhelmed me, so I didn’t see it in theaters back in the fall.  The previews made it look like a lifeless throwback, kind of a stale, cliché-ridden, formulaic, safe, predictable rehash of the respectable family drama Hollywood used to make back in the late 80s/early 90s.  And guess what?  The actual movie left me with that impression, too.  I feel like I could have watched this with my grandparents when I was in fifth grade.  (That’s not exactly an insult.  I watched The Hunt for Red October with my grandparents when I was in fifth grade and thoroughly enjoyed it.)  The Judge feels like a relic of another era.

Robert Downey, Jr. is always compelling on screen (and I know he produced the movie, so I’m really sorry I didn’t love it.  If it’s any consolation, RDJ, I did buy it to stream from amazon because it wasn’t available to rent yet, so you have my money if not my acclaim).  Together, Downey and Duvall share the kinds of intense, compelling scenes we would expect from two great actors going toe-to-toe.  But overall the film is weak, and some of the climactic trial scenes are so contrived and unrealistic that you do cry, but you bitterly resent being so shamelessly manipulated.

Shining in an otherwise unremarkable film sometimes helps an actor to an Oscar win, but I don’t think that will be the case here.

I think this year the Oscar (deservedly) belongs to J.K. Simmons.

Ethan Hawke

Age: 44
Film: Boyhood
Role:  Mason Evans, Sr., father of Samantha and Mason, Jr.  A struggling musician, Mason returns to his native Texas after taking a temporary job in Alaska and attempts to reconnect with his estranged children with initially awkward results.  Trying earnestly to make up for past mistakes, Mason soon becomes a steady, sympathetic presence in his children’s lives and provides them with many happy memories and much useful advice as they ever so slowly grow to adulthood.

Nomination History:
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for Training Day (2001).
Previously nominated for Best Adapted Screenplay for Before Sunset (2004) and Before Midnight (2013).

Why He Should Win
Hawke’s character is my favorite part of Boyhood.  I love the way we get to see him mature and develop over the years.  In some ways, it’s like he’s growing up right along with his son and daughter.

His character (Mason, Sr.) provides some of the few surprising aspects of the film.  In his first scene, he comes across as a bit of a deadbeat dad who has the potential to become emotionally abusive.  (Of course, before he ever appears, we have been primed to expect this of him.)  But to our surprise, he quickly evolves into someone who’s not actually a bad guy, just a guy who is young, inexperienced, and perhaps a bit immature.

Then later in the film, he gets remarried, takes his life in a slightly unexpected direction, and surprises us yet again.  (Most surprising of all is that these changes all seem to work out for him.)

So Mason, Sr. is easy to like and fun to watch.  I keep asking myself, though, how much of this has to do with Hawke’s performance, and how much of it is just the character he’s playing.  (Now granted, I think that Hawke had quite a bit of input into the nature and progression of the character, and that should probably be taken into account, too.)

Hawke doesn’t really get the same opportunity to show dramatic emotional turmoil in moments of heightened tension that co-star Patricia Arquette does.  His performance doesn’t seem particularly challenging.  On the other hand, he’s always convincing, so does “challenging” really matter?

Of course, by far the most remarkable aspect of the performance is that it was filmed over the course of twelve years.  That’s a long commitment, so the Oscar nomination is definitely deserved for that reason alone.

I’ve also become a big fan of the lullaby Mason Sr. sings to his kids.  Hawke actually wrote that song, and I think it’s a shame he didn’t get nominated for that (though I have no complaints about the songs they did select).

Why He Might Not Win
Earlier in the year, I was positive that either Hawke or Patricia Arquette would get a supporting nomination, but back in the summer, I expected the Academy to honor one or the other, not both.  But then it turned out to be a pretty weak year (though Best Actor is ridiculously overcrowded as always).  And now they’re both nominated.

Let’s face it, though, Arquette is the one poised to win (and even she doesn’t feel quite like a lock).

Hawke plays perhaps the most likable, sympathetic character in Boyhood, but he has almost no chance to win the Oscar.  There are so many other ways the Academy can (and quite possibly will) honor Linklater’s film.

J.K. Simmons is a tour de force in Whiplash, and 2015 really feels like his time.  If by some bizarre turn of events Simmons doesn’t win, I would expect Edward Norton to be next in line.  And honestly, once Simmons is removed from the picture, even Robert Duvall becomes a threat.

Hawke is great in Boyhood, but Patricia Arquette has a showier role in the same movie.  He may win an Oscar one of these years, but not in 2015.

Edward Norton

Age:  45
Film:  Birdman
Role:  Mike, a celebrated Broadway actor who unfortunately has an ego and a drinking problem to match his fame.  Egomaniacal and wildly unpredictable, Mike is dedicated to his craft and brings a lot of fame to former Hollywood action star Riggan Thomson’s troubled Broadway production, but at what cost?

Nomination History:
Previously nominated for Best Actor for American History X (1998).
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for Primal Fear (1996).

Why He Should Win
Edward Norton is phenomenal here, so good that although I firmly believe J.K. Simmons deserves to win, an upset by Norton would not disappoint me horrifically (though I would prefer a victory for Simmons.  That just seems fair.)

Norton is a scene-stealer in Birdman for sure (which is particularly delightful because he’s a scene-stealer playing a scene-stealer).  Often his outrageous, insufferable behavior comes across as funny to the movie audience.  What’s great, though, is that during such moments, Michael Keaton is able to shine in a more subtle, dramatic way, playing a guy who is extremely frustrated at being upstaged and robbed of control.

Birdman is definitely a movie for people who love acting.  Having some personal experience performing a play will probably add to the audience’s enjoyment, but honestly anyone who likes to see dynamic actors reflecting on their craft in brilliantly staged paired scenes will likely eat this up.  (Having Norton play a “difficult” actor who argues with directors and rewrites his own material is also a great little meta inside joke for anyone who has even casually followed his career.)

Norton is fabulous with just about everyone he’s paired with.  He and Keaton are very well matched and have some fantastically entertaining heated exchanges.  Then in his scenes with Emma Stone, Norton opens up a completely different side of his complex character.  I also will never forget his horribly awkward encounter onstage with Naomi Watts.  That’s such an uncomfortable moment, and both actors play it so memorably and so well.

This is honestly the most I’ve liked Edward Norton in anything since Fight Club.  It’s a killer part, and he really sinks his teeth into it.

Why He Might Not Win
J.K. Simmons is the reason Norton won’t win.  The veteran actor is doing career best work in a role that perfectly showcases his talents.

I’ve heard a lot of people (Oscar pundits, film critics, movie bloggers) say that in another year (without Simmons), Norton would win Best Supporting Actor easily.  And as far as I’m concerned, those people are right.

Norton is a scene stealer in Birdman, a huge presence in the film.  If not for Simmons, he would definitely walk away with the award on Oscar night.  To be honest, he could conceivably win the Oscar anyway.  That would be a shocking upset since Simmons feels more like a lock than any other nominee this year, but it’s the Oscars, and anything can happen.

Mark Ruffalo

Age: 47
Film:  Foxcatcher
Role:  Olympic wrestler turned wrestling coach Dave Schultz, older brother of protagonist Mark Schultz and central figure in a shocking 1996 crime committed by John du Pont, the mentally unstable heir to a fortune who for a short time ran a training facility for wrestlers on his compound at Foxcatcher Farm.

Nomination History:
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Kids Are All Right (2010).

Why He Should Win
Channing Tatum is so intense and Steve Carell is so bizarre in this film that in some ways, Ruffalo’s quiet, realistic, understated performance is like a breath of fresh air.

Since Dave is the one most centrally involved in the historical event on which Foxcatcher is based, you would expect Ruffalo’s performance to be at the center of the film.  But it isn’t.  For most of the movie, Dave is either off-screen or a muted presence in the room. He’s a terribly significant character because of the way that his younger brother responds to his existence, but in the flesh, he’s not particularly impressive.  He’s just a simple, humble guy who is dedicated to his family, good at what he does, and motivate to keep his nose down and get his job done with as little fuss as possible.

Ruffalo plays him beautifully, an understated performance of an understated guy.  Dave really isn’t into theatrics or battles of ego which makes what ultimately happens to him all the more baffling.

I particularly love the documentary interview scene when the guy with the camera asks Dave to explain why he looks up to John du Pont and considers him a mentor.  It’s so uncomfortable, and the way Ruffalo plays it gives us a perfect idea of what makes Dave tick.

Why He Might Not Win
I don’t see why Mark Ruffalo would win.  Clearly Foxcatcher has a lot of support from the Academy.  (Miller even got the directing nod which was the probably the biggest surprise in that category.)  But still, the whole movie feels like an also-ran.  In almost every case, I have the sense that the nomination is the award.  (I’m not saying it won’t win anything, but I don’t foresee it winning anything big.)

Ruffalo’s career has really kicked into high gear lately, and I think he has plenty of chances for future nominations and wins.  Though he does some of the most subtle, most real acting in the film, Ruffalo does not have as showy a part as most of the actors nominated in this category this year.  Channing Tatum and Steve Carell pull our focus most of the time.  Ruffalo is great in the film, but his part is relatively small.  In marked contrast, J.K. Simmons is the driving force of Whiplash.  Miles Teller may be the protagonist, but Simmons is the one whose performance we take home with us when we leave the theater.

J.K. Simmons

Age: 60
Film:  Whiplash
Role: Terrence Fletcher, highly respected conductor at a prestigious East Coast music conservatory who takes an interest in promising young drummer Andrew Neiman who aspires to be a jazz great.  Fletcher expects excellence from his pupils and has a reputation for being harsh and demanding the best by pushing limits.  But does he really inspire his students to greatness, or is he merely an abusive sadist?

Nomination History:
This is Simmons’s first nomination.

Why He Should Win
Whiplash is one of my favorite films of the year, and I was thrilled to see it get a Best Picture nomination.  When I bought my ticket, of course I had already heard that J.K. Simmons was generating Best Supporting Actor buzz.  Then as I watched the performance unfold on screen, before too long, I just knew.  That’s it.  Slam dunk.  He’s winning.

Frankly I will be stunned if Simmons doesn’t win this year.  Several factors are working in his favor.  1) He thoroughly deserves the award based on the strength of the performance.  2) He’s been scooping up precursors right and left 3) He’s in the right stage of a long, successful career to get recognition for his work.

If you’ve seen Whiplash, then I’m sure I don’t need to tell you why Simmons’s performance is so Oscar worthy.  I’m sure you get it.  I realize not everyone has the same tastes, so possibly not everyone will like the performance, but I dare you to forget it.  As played by Simmons, Fletcher is the kind of guy you don’t easily forget.

For me, Simmons’s performance is so great partially because Fletcher is superficially similar to the sort of character Simmons always plays, only more so.  But the longer we spend with Fletcher, the more we realize that the man is not simply loud and blustery, he is a true sadist, and apparently a tormented sadist at that. So while at first glance, Simmons is not deviating from his typical screen persona that much, by the time we’ve seen the entire performance we’ve watched him journey to a much darker and more intense place than most roles have given him opportunity to explore.

Fletcher and Andrew have such intense screen chemistry that it’s impossible to look away from their nerve-wracking scenes—and such scenes comprise most of the movie.

Also I can honestly say that Whiplash’s final scene is probably most the exhilarating thing I’ve seen on screen all year.  That scene is going to become iconic.  It’s a riveting piece of cinema, and the only actors involved are Miles Teller and J.K. Simmons.

If Simmons doesn’t win the Oscar, it will be the most shocking upset of the night.  Now granted, Edward Norton would also be a worthy winner, but this feels like Simmons’s moment, the right part at the right time.  I’m pretty sure he’ll be walking away with a well-deserved Oscar in February.

Why He Might Not Win
He will.

Back to Top