Willem Dafoe
Age: 62
Film: The Florida Project
Role: Bobby, the compassionate and reliable manager of the Magic Castle, a budget motel near Disney World where a number of impoverished Floridians live as semi-permanent guests, including six-year-old Moonee and Halley, her self-sabotaging, dysfunctional mother.
Nomination History:
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for Platoon (1986) and Shadow of the Vampire (2000).
Why He Should Win:
Sean Baker’s The Florida Project deserves a place among the year’s Best Picture nominees. Yes, a case could be made that it stigmatizes poverty for some viewers (who will argue that single mother Halley is her own worst enemy, kept down not by bad luck or a broken system so much as her own deficient social skills and inherent vindictiveness). But I don’t think the film should be faulted too much for that (especially because not everyone will interpret it that way). This window into a unsuspecting child’s precarious life is so engrossing, fast-paced, high energy, captivating, touching, sad. Now that I’ve finally seen it, I find myself wishing that the Academy had shown Baker’s film a little more love.
Willem Dafoe is a big part of what makes the film so special. The child actors are easy to watch, and Bria Vinaite gives a spellbinding (and disturbing) performance as an impoverished single mother who is both genuinely loving and grossly incompetent, but I think the film actually works thanks to the presence of a seasoned actor who can properly react to all of the pitiable madness going on around him. Child protagonist Moonee is a strong presence, but she is painfully (to us, we’re the ones feeling the pain) unaware of how grossly dysfunctional and dangerous her life is. But Bobby knows. Bobby cares. He can’t do much about it, granted, but at least he knows and cares.
The audience sympathizes with this guy immediately. It takes us a little longer to warm up to his tenants, though. One of my favorite things about the film is how bratty the children seem at the beginning, and then how we gradually begin to love them and appreciate the purity of their innocence which seems like an amazing miracle given the details of their lives.
Bobby is in charge of fixing a world in which nothing is working. Ever. He’s the manager of a motel where all the broken people live. It’s like a purgatory of his own choosing. Brief scenes with his own adult son reveal that he’s seeking refuge at this miserable place from the failures of his own broken life.
His obvious care for people who won’t (or can’t) help themselves is at once endearing and sad.
I think he’s best in the moment when he helps the stranger get a soda. That’s not part of his job description, but he realizes that it is his responsibility. Nobody else is even looking. The children remain unaware that anything has happened.
How sad it must be to be Bobby! His own life is broken, so he makes it his mission to do unappreciated kindnesses for self-sabotaging people who (as he can plainly see) are doomed to fail in the end.
As you watch, you wonder if the Moonees of the world ever grow up to appreciate the Bobbys. Then again, it’s probably hard to spare too many thoughts for the person who throws you a pair of water wings when you’re about to go over Niagra Falls.
People keep saying Dafoe is doing career best work. I, for one, have never seen him do bad work. I honestly think he’s pretty great in everything. This is just a role that has gotten a lot of people’s attention because the film is so captivating.
If Willem Dafoe does win the Oscar, he will certainly deserve it. If he does not, I have no doubt that he will continue doing great work and win at some point in the near future, now that he has recaptured the Academy’s attention.
Why He Might Not Win:
Early on, Dafoe looked like a sure thing to win the Oscar, but at this stage, Sam Rockwell seems to have it all locked up.
Three Billboards has consistently gotten a lot of love this awards season. Sam Rockwell gives a great and showy performance as the most dynamic character. Rockwell has already won the Globe and the SAG. I expect him to win the Oscar, too.
But you never know. There’s nothing not to love about Dafoe’s performance. We’ll see what happens.
Woody Harrelson
Age: 56
Film: Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
Role: Willoughby, beloved and feisty sheriff of Ebbing Missouri called out by Mildred Hayes on three billboards outside of town for failing to solve her daughter’s rape and murder, who, though sympathetic to her suffering, cannot focus exclusively on the case because he faces a serious crisis of his own.
Nomination History:
Previously nominated for Best Actor for The People vs. Larry Flint (1996).
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Messenger (2009).
Why He Should Win:
I’m always happy to see Woody Harrelson, and Three Billboards is my favorite movie of the year, so I’m thrilled he got this nomination.
Of course, it is kind of sad and surprising that Michael Stuhlbarg isn’t nominated for his work in one of the 165 films he appeared in this awards season. (Seriously, he has a speaking role in three of the nominees for Best Picture, including a pretty special moment in Call Me By Your Name. I also really liked Mark Rylance in Dunkirk, Michael Shannon in The Shape of Water, and Patrick Stewart in Logan, but you can’t nominate everybody.) Harrelson deserves this nomination for sure, but I was surprised (and thrilled) when he actually got it.
While I was watching Three Billboards, I started to feel kind of sad as I realized, Woody Harrelson is phenomenal in this, but he’s never going to get nominated because Sam Rockwell is just dominating the final third of the film. Both men give excellent performances, but not only does Rockwell play the more dynamic character, he keeps right on growing and changing until he practically morphs into the male lead by the end.
With a performance like that given by another supporting actor in the same film, who would think Harrelson could pull off an Oscar nod, too! The Academy must love Three Billboards as much as I do.
The movie certainly benefits from the steadying presence of Woody Harrelson as Sheriff Willoughby. Three Billboards wouldn’t be the same film without Harrelson. To put it bluntly, Ebbing, Missouri doesn’t seem like a great place to live, and it’s certainly a tortuous place to visit. Everybody we meet there is so tormented and intense.
Thank God for Willoughby! He may be dying of cancer, but still, in the early scenes of the film, he’s the only person we encounter who has anything approaching equanimity. In contrast to Mildred’s grieving persistence and Dixon’s deranged defensiveness, Willoughby displays a welcome calm, a stoic acceptance, and even, at moments, an enviable joy. When he’s present, nothing seems quite as desperate. When he’s gone, the characters really feel his absence, and so does the audience.
Harrelson is fantastic when he reads the voiceover narration of his letter to Dixon. That’s probably the scene in the film that replays most often in my imagination. It’s an electrifying moment that sets a course for the remainder of the story.
And in that early interrogation scene with Frances McDormand, Harrelson is just brilliant, too. When their encounter unexpectedly draws to a premature close, Harrelson’s reaction is so stirring.
I’m so glad he’s nominated for Best Supporting Actor for his work in Three Billboards. I was so worried he would be overshadowed by Sam Rockwell, in a meatier role.
Why He Might Not Win:
I can envision many sets of circumstances in which Rockwell fails to win the Oscar. But if he loses to Woody Harrelson, it just wouldn’t feel right.
Harrelson is fantastic, but, as I’ve said, Rockwell has the more impressive part. It’s a role of a lifetime for him (a character actor with a lifetime of great roles under his belt).
If for some reason, voters don’t want to give the Oscar to Rockwell, I have a hard time believing they’d choose Harrelson to honor instead. For one thing, some non-Rockwell votes are bound to be inspired by backlash against the movie. Also, if you’re feeling motivated to make Rockwell lose, wouldn’t you cast your vote for someone like Willem Dafoe (or maybe even Christopher Plummer), someone who seems to be next in line who could conceivably win the award? And then, too, there’s always Richard Jenkins, appearing in a film with thirteen nominations that surely most people will actually watch.
I love Harrelson, but this isn’t his year. Of the five nominees, he’s the least likely to win by a wide margin. To be honest, in a category so competitive this year, it was a miracle just to get his (much deserved) nomination. Surely he’s not expecting to have to give a speech. I just don’t see it happening unless shady secrets about Rockwell come out (and I’m not implying there are any) causing voters who loved the film to select its other supporting actor.
Age: 70
Film: The Shape of Water
Role: Giles, Elisa’s only non-work friend who helps her break someone out of a top secret government facility because it means so much to her and he has no one else in his life but his cats and the stars of old movies he watches on TV.
Nomination History:
Previously nominated for The Visitor (2008).
Why He Should Win:
I would love to see Richard Jenkins win an Oscar for his work in The Shape of Water. (I’m so in love with all the performances in this category that I get sad when confronted with the reality that four of them must be denied an Oscar.)
Why He Might Not Win:
Sam Rockwell needs to have a speech prepared. At this point, he’s the clear front runner. Still, the evening is bound to have a few surprises, and this is the category in which I can most easily imagine an upset.
The Shape of Water is a clear front runner for Best Picture, and its earned far more nominations than any other film this year.
Since the movie is so popular, it’s not too hard to imagine that popularity translating to an Oscar win for a member of its cast.
Of course, it’s also worth mentioning that Three Billboards is a serious contender for Best Picture, too, meaning that Sam Rockwell could be the one swept into an acting win (as everyone expects).
I wouldn’t count on a win for Jenkins, but I wouldn’t count him out, either.
Christopher Plummer
Age: 88
Film: All the Money in the World
Role: J. Paul Getty, billionaire industrialist and art collector who somewhat inscrutably initially refuses to pay the ransom of his kidnapped grandson Paul despite the increasingly desperate pleas of the boy’s mother.
Nomination History:
Won Best Supporting Actor Oscar for Beginners (2011).
Previously nominated for Best Supporting Actor for The Last Station (2009).
Why He Should Win:
All the Money in the World is better than you’ve probably heard (unless you heard from me because I loved it).
Forget about Kevin Spacey. Forget that the eighty-eight-year-old Plummer (incidentally the oldest ever acting nominee) flew to London and Rome at a moment’s notice to film his entire part in just nine days.
I ask you to forget those things for just a moment because I think many people who haven’t seen the film assume that Plummer’s nomination is political. In the wake of all the allegations of sexual misconduct swirling around Kevin Spacey, Ridley Scott made the controversial decision to remove a principal actor from his completed film one month before its opening, recast the role, and reshoot every scene in which Spacey had appeared (except for one far away shot on location where you don’t see his face). And it is true that given the present mood in Hollywood, voters are probably only too happy to show their disdain for Spacey and reward Scott’s bold decision to remove an alleged sex offender from his film. I’ll grant that politics did bring Plummer’s astonishing feat to his peers’ attention.
But let’s not forget that before his virtual blacklisting, Kevin Spacey probably took the role of J. Paul Getty because he hoped for an Oscar nomination himself. I mean, unlike Plummer, the decades younger Spacey had to be dramatically aged for the role. I’m sure this involved spending hours in the make-up chair at the bare minimum. Surely Spacey signed on for such a role hoping to win a third Oscar.
That’s the thing about J. Paul Getty in All the Money in the World. He may not have the most screentime, but he’s the character who drives all the action by prolonging (arguably even creating) the central conflict. Getty’s presence dominates the movie at all times, much like Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lecter in The Silence of the Lambs. This part seems written to win a great actor acclaim, much like the Marion McPherson role in Lady Bird.
So even if the Spacey debacle did help to get Plummer’s work noticed, the part itself is written to win an Oscar for the right actor, and is Plummer ever the right actor!
I love him as Getty, more than I can imagine loving Kevin Spacey, to be honest. Now obviously, this is not fair to Spacey whose talent (unlike his crimes) is proven. He’s a gifted actor, but (because Scott has said no one will ever see his performance) I am basing my impressions of his work entirely on something generated by my imagination. Still it’s hard not to imagine his Getty being a twisted villain, and in the few stills I have seen of him made up for the role, he looks so…fake? He just looks like he’s trying too hard.
Plummer, on the other hand, doesn’t need a lot of make-up to convince me he’s an old man. He is an old man. And I mean that as a compliment. The script gives him all these wonderful, thought-provoking, philosophical things to say, and I believe his Getty has acquired the wisdom (and well as the corruption) to meditate on these matters. Plummer just seems so sincere. I kind of love his Getty because much of what he says and does is monstrous, yet we see that he’s operating by some warped internal logic. He’s so used to the sound of his own voice, he’s sort of forgotten that other people exist. At times he seems a bit crazy. Yet at other moments I found myself thinking, But why isn’t he entitled to live by whatever crazy philosophy he wishes? The entire world is crazy. He seems to think he occupies a space outside conventional reality, but who’s to say he’s wrong?
I like his Getty. I don’t mean only that I enjoy the performance. I mean I find the character oddly sympathetic for someone so horrible. Plummer and Michelle Williams make great sparring partners. It’s as if they spend the entire film playing a game of ideological chess. And I love the moment when Getty has an epiphany and suddenly begins to understand his ex-daughter-in-law’s point of view.
(I really loved Michelle Williams in this, too. I wish there had been room for her in Best Actress. Maybe they need to create a sixth “emeritus” nomination reserved each year just for Meryl Streep. Then they wouldn’t need to use one of the traditional nominations on her unless they actually intended to give her the award, thus freeing up a spot for somebody else most years.)
Probably most people who see Plummer’s performance will not be able to help comparing him with some imagined performance by Kevin Spacey. (And I’m pretty sure most of us will unintentionally imagine Spacey being worse because we’re all so mad at him right now.)
But Spacey aside, Plummer is actually giving one of the finest performances of his long and celebrated career as J. Paul Getty. He deserves this nomination. In fact he deserves to win.
Why He Might Not Win:
Sam Rockwell deserves to win, too, and he’s going to (well probably).
If I were not so in love with Rockwell’s performance, I would probably find myself rooting hard for Christopher Plummer this year.
And honestly, I can see a surprise scenario in which Plummer does win. He’s the right kind of beloved veteran to pull off a last minute upset. Granted that does not happen as often as it used to, but it’s still the kind of event that screams Oscars. I’d never count out a beloved veteran in Best Supporting Actor. I’ve been watching for too long.
Remember when Eddie Murphy was supposed to win for Dream Girls and Alan Arkin shocked everyone (or at least Eddie Murphy who dramatically left)? Sam Rockwell is a first time nominee, and some people find his character (despite his amazing arc) kind of repugnant. Of course, Rockwell is not Eddie Murphy, so he’s got that working in his favor. (To be clear, I love Eddie Murphy, but it would seem that the Academy does not.)
I think Rockwell should win the Oscar. He’s honestly the one person in all the acting categories I’m rooting for hardest. If he doesn’t win, I’ll be disappointed.
But I’ll level with you. Now that I know who the other nominees are, I won’t be as heart-broken as I might have imagined previously because I loved every one of these performances.
In fact, if Christopher Plummer wins, I might even be rather pleased. He’s magnificent in this role, and he had so little time to prepare. I would clap for him for sure.
Sam Rockwell
Age: 49
Film:
Role: Jason Dixon, an obnoxious, racist, screw-up police officer who gets a nasty shock, a dose of powerful motivation, and then somehow becomes the most fascinating character ever, driving the action of the movie to its powerful conclusion.
Nomination History:
This is Rockwell’s first nomination.
Why He Should Win:
Normally we only get to see radical transformations like Jason Dixon’s in made-for-TV Christmas movies or, occasionally, frustratingly unrealistic romantic comedies. Actors often win awards for playing characters who do not remain static, who are enlightened by self discovery or destroyed by some crisis. But Dixon is so dynamic that he changes the entire trajectory of the story with his transformation. He practically switches its genre. He definitely alters its course. It’s like the fires of change within him burn so hot that everything he touches gets smelted down and reborn right along with him.
Why He Might Not Win: