Best Supporting Actor 2005

1998 through 2007

Best Supporting Actor 2005

George Clooney - Syriana
1
3%
Matt Dillon - Crash
2
6%
Paul Giamatti - Cinderella Man
2
6%
Jake Gyllenhaal - Brokeback Mountain
21
60%
William Hurt - A History of Violence
9
26%
 
Total votes: 35

User avatar
Precious Doll
Tenured
Posts: 3098
Joined: Mon Jan 13, 2003 2:20 am
Location: Sydney
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby Precious Doll » Mon Jul 23, 2012 2:31 am

I can only echo what a number have already stated: weak line up with the exception of Jake Gyllenhaal who is in the wrong category.

My choices:

1. Michael Kelly for Loggergeads
2. Jalil Lespert for La Petit Lieutenant
3. Jason Ritter for Happy Endings
4. Danny Huston for The Constant Gardner
5. Bill Nighy for The Constant Gardner
"I have no interest in all of that. I find that all tabloid stupidity" Woody Allen, The Guardian, 2014, in response to his adopted daughter's allegations.

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7231
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby Sabin » Mon Jul 23, 2012 1:07 am

For me, this should have been the year that Jeff Daniels got his first nomination and won an Oscar. I’ve seen The Squid and the Whale about five times now, and it’s merely his presence that makes him seem like a leading actor. Really it’s Jesse Eisenberg’s story and his relationship with his father haunts him. It’s a borderline case but for me, Jeff Daniels is supporting in that film. And with how mysteriously weak this year was for Supporting Actor contenders, I think he could have conceivably upset George Clooney and Paul Giamatti and won.

…or not.

I guess I don’t have much choice but to give it to Jake Gyllenhaal in one of the most egregious cases of category fraud in the history of ever. He’s actually gone a bit underrated in the film. 2005 was such a strong year for leading men that he had no chance of getting in and would not have deserved a nomination over the likes of half those who weren’t even in major consideration. But I’d argue that he’s the only actor giving something that feels genuine in this competition, and if I’m not a Brokeback cheerleader like some he certainly contributes to at least half the heartbreak in one of the more devastating endings in a film in the past decade.

Don’t know who’s off first. Well, actually, yeah I do. First off has to be William Hurt, whose performance in A History of Violence succeeds at first in simply being unexpectedly bat-shit, but it upends the progression of the narrative and it owes really the entirety of its effect to David Cronenberg’s reliably lunatic framing. He’s so close to the left of the frame that you fear he’s going to disappear and run at you from the snack bar. William Hurt is a strange actor who’s been very good in the past, but this isn’t one of his finest moments. They were really searching for somebody. The Hollywood Foreign Press nominated Clooney, Dillon, and Giamatti, all of whom were pretty sewn up early on, and then they nominated Will Ferrell for The Producers (who had no chance of being nominated) and Bob Hoskins for Mrs. Henderson Presents…who maybe did. I’ve never seen the film and I likely never will, but on paper he certainly looks like a potential nominee. Then the Screen Actor’s Guild nominated Gyllenhaal alongside Clooney, Dillon, and Giamatti as well as not Terrence Howard but rather Don Cheadle from Crash, which was the first blip of buzz for the actor in the film. The three major critic’s groups all went for A History of Violence actors, but only the National Society of Film Critics went for Ed Harris while LA and NY fetted William Hurt. Although they clearly were not that enamored with the film as we can see from Maria Bello’s lack of a nomination, the fifth slot in this category was a void that Hurt’s lunacy could fill.

Can’t honor anybody in Crash. Matt Dillon is fine. He’s not bad. But there’s really nothing he can do. Crash is bad television, and Matt Dillon is playing just another nuance-less monster, but at least he probably deserves a little better. Terrence Howard is the actor who took something blatantly illogical and made it work.

I have no idea why but George Clooney only wins Oscars or becomes a front-runner for movies and characters that nobody is going to remember. What’s his name in Out of Sight? Jack Foley. What’s his name in Up in the Air? Ryan Bingham. Michael Clayton is an easy one. What’s his name in The Descendants? Tell me what Matt King is like? Who is he in Syriana and tell me all about him? He’s not bad in the film, but lifted from the buzz surrounding his 2005’s double offering of Good Night, and Good Luck. and his performance here, it just doesn’t seem right for him to win an Oscar for Syriana. Of course that means of his admittedly impressive four acting nominations, he’s not going to win one from me.

Likewise, lifted from the aftermath of missing out on nominations for American Splendor and Sideways, there’s not much pressing me to honor Paul Giamatti for Cinderella Man. Nothing in Cinderella Man deserves an Oscar and the most you can say for Paul Giamatti is that he’s very good in this kind of role, but there’s just not enough opportunities for him to inject this shouty role with personality. Had the film been released in the Holiday Season or in August like the Seabiscuit underdog everyone was clearly hoping this would be, it might have picked up more traction and carried him to victory. But nobody loves a flop, and that’s what it was.

Best Supporting Actor
1. Jeff Daniels, The Squid and the Whale
2. Mickey Rourke, Sin City
3. Kevin Costner, The Upside of Anger
4. Owen Kline, The Squid and the Whale
5. Val Kilmer, Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
"If you are marching with white nationalists, you are by definition not a very nice person. If Malala Yousafzai had taken part in that rally, you'd have to say 'Okay, I guess Malala sucks now.'" ~ John Oliver

mlrg
Adjunct
Posts: 1070
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby mlrg » Sun Jul 22, 2012 7:55 pm

Votei for Cloney

Bruce_Lavigne
Graduate
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby Bruce_Lavigne » Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:40 pm

To me, 2005 was a cinematic year overflowing with award-worthy performances by supporting actors -- I've only made a list up to the top 10, but if I ranked the next 10 as well, I have no doubt I'd end up with 10 performances I'd happily nominate over my #5 picks from most surrounding years. Unfortunately, of a fairly deep pool, only a very limited and unimpressive group seemed to be on the radar for Oscar nominations.

Jake Gyllenhaal is the first to go from my ballot -- yeah, because he's a lead, but honestly, it's more because I never really considered him award-worthy in any category. He capably holds up his end of a great film, but Ledger so thoroughly eclipses him off the screen (even when they're not together) that in this crowded year, he doesn't come anywhere near my list of Best Actor worthies either.

George Clooney in Syriana is another good actor who does what he needs to do for his part of his movie to be effective, but only Alexander Siddig and Jeffrey Wright strike me as award-worthy in Syriana.

I'd say Matt Dillon only gives the second-best performance in Crash, behind Terrence Howard. They're both great, however (as is Don Cheadle in the same film). I wouldn't nominate anyone from Crash because the movie is so lacking overall, but I wouldn't have begrudged Howard a nod (I'm much happier with the one he got), and I don't begrudge Dillon his.

I don't know how much Paul Giamatti's Best Actor snub the previous year had to do with his supporting nomination this year (I'd guess it was a lot), and to be honest, I don't care. I'll go on record saying that his Cinderella Man performance could have earned the spot on his own. Sure, the scrappy, fast-talking boxing manager/trainer may be a fairly clichéd supporting part, but at the same time it's one that's almost always effective, and this time is no exception -- plus, there are a few wrinkles here that keep it from being completely rote (such as Joe's revelation that his high-roller lifestyle is a bluff). Put an actor as talented as Giamatti in a role like that, and you're almost certainly going to end up with something dynamite -- and in this case, I'd argue, Oscar-worthy. I was rooting for him...

... But that's only because I knew there was no way in hell William Hurt was going to win. A History of Violence is my pick for 2005's best film, and Hurt makes such a vivid impression that I knew as soon as I saw the movie he was going to win my personal supporting-actor prize. His Richie Cusack masterfully becomes a more and more comedic figure as his scene goes on (no true comedy of '05 gave me anything nearly as funny as Hurt's reaction to being locked out of his mansion -- and his subsequent search for his keys), but never loses his essential menace. Plus, as someone on this board (I think it was Penelope) pointed out at the time, it's a performance that has the character's entire life behind it -- an impressive achievement by an actor in any role, and all the moreso in a part this small. His every line reading and gesture is the sum total of a lifetime of ambition, disappointment, anger, and love for his brother -- he's angrier that Joey is back in his life, forcing him to kill his little brother, than he is at the initial transgression that drove Joey into hiding. Only a lack of more good scenes keeps this from being my favorite performance, regardless of category, from 2005; as it is, it's more than enough to get my vote for Best Supporting Actor.

My ballot:
1. William Hurt (A History of Violence)
2. Mickey Rourke (Frank Miller's Sin City)
3. Paul Giamatti (Cinderella Man)
4. Ray Wise (Good Night, and Good Luck)
5. Chiwetel Ejiofor (Serenity
-------------------------------------------------------------
6. Michael Lonsdale (Munich)
7. Tom Hollander (Pride & Prejudice)
8. Robert Patrick (Walk the Line)
9. Donald Sutherland (Pride & Prejudice)
10. Alexander Siddig (Syriana)

Mister Tee
Laureate
Posts: 6264
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby Mister Tee » Sun Jul 22, 2012 5:14 pm

Dreary year; dull slate. As others have suggested, Ed Harris was more deserving than William Hurt in A History of Violence, especially because of what BJ pinpoints: the fact that the film crashes during Hurt's segment. I'd also support Costner's appealing work in Upside of Anger (a role quite analogous to Jack Nicholson's winning work in Terms of Endearment), Matthieu Amalric in Munich, and Clifton Collins Jr. in Capote (why is such a fascinating character as Perry Smith always bypassed by the Oscars?).

Matt Dillon is stuck with the least believable strand of Crash ("I'm evil racist scum by night, heroic rescuer the next day"), and doesn't do anything to redeem the concept. Dillon's gift as an actor -- and I do believe it's a gift -- is an ability to look as if he's just strolled in from reality, without a single acting lesson, and fit right into his environment. This has worked alot better for him in richer, less problematic films than Crash. But I guess his career rates a lifetime mention.

Paul Giammatti has given all kinds of splendid performances in the last decade, and this is the crud for which they nominate him. I think this nomination is completely condescending: it says, All right, little chubby troll, confine yourself to parts that people of your anatomy have been playing since L.B. Mayer days, and we'll give you the crumb of a nomination. But don't bother us when you play leading man parts. (Yes, I remain bitter about Sideways)

George Clooney's nomination (and win, of course) had a good deal to do with his multi-tasking year. But I think the fact that he played such a deadly serious, even glum character represented such a change of pace from his then frequent glib leading man that it struck many as stretching/"really acting". In the years since, Clooney has shown alot more range, and this win seems a bit odd -- perhaps a proxy for a second place finish as best director.

But, like most so far, I have to go with Jake Gyllenhaal. I know this selection is going to make Bruce LaVigne moan in pain, but I don't see this as the most absurd category demotion of recent times (Casey Affleck, for one, would definitely score higher). I fall somewhere between BJ's and Flmfan's take on it: I think there's an argument for Ledger and Gyllenhaal as co-leads, but I also see the film as centered around Ledger's character and i wouldn't hoot this supporting classification out of the room. In any case, Gyllenhaal is by far the best of these nominees, and has almost no competition for my vote here.
Last edited by Mister Tee on Sun Jul 22, 2012 8:16 pm, edited 1 time in total.

bizarre
Assistant
Posts: 558
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby bizarre » Sun Jul 22, 2012 4:21 pm

This was a good year for this category, even if the nominees were a bit boring after the dozens of possibilities that were thrown around.

Terrence Howard (Crash) was probably closest in line, with Bob Hoskins (Mrs. Henderson Presents) in the wings, although other contenders whose traction stalled were Kevin Costner (The Upside of Anger), Ed Harris (A History of Violence), Val Kilmer (Kiss Kiss Bang Bang), Peter Sarsgaard (Jarhead), Frank Langella (Good Night, and Good Luck), Michael Pena & Don Cheadle (Crash), Clifton Collins Jr (Capote), Mickey Rourke (Sin City), Donald Sutherland (Pride & Prejudice) and Edward Norton (Kingdom of Heaven). And many others with less of a chance were cited by precursor groups (Ferrell, Amalric, Huston, Nelson, Rush, Wright, Eisenberg, Pepper, Platt, Hollander, Clooney again).

That being said I've only seen Dillon and Hurt. Hurt is a blast of fresh air into what I felt to be an incredibly stuffy and flavourless attempt at a "harrowing" cerebrality à la Haneke. He might be a ham but the film around him is so grey that it hardly matters. Dillon is solid, making the most of a ridiculous role in a ridiculous film.

My nominees:
1. Tom Hollander ... Pride & Prejudice
2. Hugo Weaving ... Little Fish
3. Maurice Bénichou ... Caché
4. Eugene Hutz ... Everything Is Illuminated
5. Val Kilmer ... Kiss Kiss Bang Bang

Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 15408
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby Big Magilla » Sun Jul 22, 2012 2:46 pm

Clooney and Dillon were decent fillers, but Giamatti and Hurt were "what were they thinking" nominees in slots I gave to Jeff Daniels in The Squid and the Whale and Frank Langella in Good Night, and Good Luck. Jake Gyllenhaal, though, gives the best performance among the nominees, even if strictly speaking it wasn't a supporting role.

The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4066
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby The Original BJ » Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:48 pm

2005's acting categories were really lopsided: Actor and Supporting Actress were overflowing with strong candidates, but Actress and Supporting Actor were both woefully weak. I'd have wiped this whole slate clean, but even then, the best I could come up with to fill it would be borderline lead candidates, like The Squid and the Whale's Jeff Daniels (is it Eisenberg's story, or is this cheating?) and The Best of Youth's Alessio Boni (even closer to cheating, but he is mostly absent the last two hours), and good-not-great contenders from Best Picture nominees that, puzzlingly, never got much traction: Good Night, and Good Luck's Frank Langella, Munich's Ciarán Hinds, and Capote's Clifton Collins, Jr.

I like A History of Violence quite a bit, but I thought the movie took a real nosedive once William Hurt's character appeared. Part of this had to do with the direction the narrative took, but I can't say Hurt's villainous performance entirely worked for me either -- I definitely had a couple bad laughs during this sequence. The part is small, too, and even among supporting actors from his own film, I prefer Ashton Holmes and Ed Harris.

I'd wanted Paul Giamatti nominated as Best Actor the previous two years, so I guess it was nice he finally made it on to the shortlist. But frankly, his past snubs struck me as the main reason he made it on to the list (and even came close to winning) -- I don't think his Cinderella Man work is very exciting, not that any actor could make much of an impression given the utterly vanilla surroundings of Howard's film.

I didn't really like Crash when I saw it opening weekend, and I think Matt Dillon has one of the most groan-inducingly obvious arcs in the film, as he goes from racist cop to redeemed hero. Dillon has never struck me as an especially deep actor, and I didn't think he brought anything unique to the role, certainly not anything that would overcome the simplistic conception of this character. Of the supporting actors in Crash, I much preferred Terrence Howard.

Clooney was rewarded for his amazing year more than for his performance in Syriana, I think. His direction and script for Good Night, and Good Luck were genuine triumphs, but once it became clear he wouldn't be winning the Screenplay prize (UGH!), this became the most likely spot to reward him. I don't think the actor is lacking in Syriana, I just see no reason why, aside from his star power and the context of his year, that this performance would even seem nomination-level. In something of a trend for this category, I think the best supporting actor in the film was someone else -- Alexander Siddig.

As for Jake Gyllenhaal, he's one of the worst cases of category fraud ever. Certainly anyone who views this as a supporting role is entitled to his or her opinion...but then you'd have to argue that any actor who has a couple less scenes than his or her costar is a supporting player. Quick, describe the plot of Brokeback Mountain: would you say it's about Ennis the sheepherder who falls in love with another man one summer? Or would you say it's about TWO cowboys who fall in love? I find it hard to believe that most people wouldn't describe it as the latter, and the fact that Ledger has a couple minutes more screentime doesn't, to me, mean that Gyllenhaal should be demoted. (To compare it to other star-crossed romances, the difference in screentime/focus between Leigh and Gable in Gone With the Wind is far more significant...ditto Bogart and Bergman in Casablanca, yet there doesn't seem to be any debate that those are two-lead movies.)

Quality-wise, his performance is the only one that reaches award-level, though. As the more sexually confident of the two protagonists, his outgoing bravado -- and then his anger when his lover does not feel as comfortable wanting the life he does -- were heartbreaking to watch, and his forceful work made for a perfect counterpoint to Ledger's internalized anguish.

Gyllenhaal by a mile is the best performance, but I guess I'd have to swallow hard and say Clooney is the best supporting actor nominated.
Last edited by The Original BJ on Fri Aug 19, 2016 1:48 pm, edited 1 time in total.

FilmFan720
Tenured
Posts: 3406
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby FilmFan720 » Sun Jul 22, 2012 1:20 pm

This has to be one of the weakest line-ups I have seen in my years of Oscar-watching...a lot of actors who I like a lot, giving some of their dullest or overstated performances of their career. Of course, the quality they were given does not help.

Matt Dillon (and the rest of his cast) didn't have much of a chance thanks to the ham-fisted writing and directing he had to deal with in Crash, but it is a performance that pushes way too much. Paul Giamatti is a great actor, but he does nothing in Cinderella Man that hundreds of others haven't done in the exact same role. George Clooney is one of our most charismatic actors alive today, but a lot of that is lost in the role and the film around him is so bland that he can't escape from it. By the time William Hurt comes into A History of Violence, the film has started to completely fall apart and he doesn't help that with his scenery-chewing turn.

I don't see Jake Gyllenhaal as the horrible case of category-fraud that some do. I haven't seen the film in quite a while, but I seem to remember that Ledger and Williams get a lot more of a focus than the Gyllenhaal and Hathaway romance does, and the film really seems to follow Ennis through the journey more than Gyllenhaal. Needless to say, his is the best performance in this category (and I think the best performance in the film), and the only choice to be made here.

My Top 5:
1. Ray Wise, Good Night, and Good Luck.
2. Jake Gyllenhaal, Brokeback Mountain
3. Jeff Daniels, The Squid and the Whale
4. Ulrich Matthes, Downfall
5. Kevin Costner, The Upside of Anger
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.

ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1139
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Best Supporting Actor 2005

Postby ksrymy » Sun Jul 22, 2012 12:35 pm

A pretty solid lineup.

The only one I wouldn't nominate would be Clooney.

I don't think his nomination was to make up for his Sideways snub because Paul Giamatti is very good in a rather bland Russell Crowe vehicle. Yes, boxing manager is an easy role to take command of, but Giamatti is excellent especially during the negotiation scenes.

I don't think Crash is a bad film. Is it drivel on racism that's been rehashed a thousand times?: absolutely. Is it by any means a terrible film?: I'd say not. The ensemble cast works very well together, and the Academy chose the best of those performers in Matt Dillon. He was never taken seriously as an actor though we now realize a nomination for Drugstore Cowboy would be no disappointment. Dillon gets one of the few good roles in the film and the scenes dealing with his father are heartbreaking and his story arc with Ryan Phillippe let us see that subdued rage he's so good at showing.

When I watched A History of Violence for the first time, I wondered when Hurt would show up. He shows up for the last twenty minutes or so, but he richly deserves his nomination. He's frightening and not to be trifled with. He gets to break away from all those handsome, leading man roles from the eighties and does he ever do just that. I'd say he, not Maria Bello, is the film's standout.

But we all know Jake Gyllenhaal will win here. Category fraud this and that. I'd actually lean and say he's supporting only because the focus on the film seems to be Ennis more than Jack, but that can obviously be rejected so let that debate commence.

I actually believe that Maggie Gyllenhaal is the much better actress. She got the roles to expose this talent (Secretary, Sherrybaby, and even her bit roles in Adaptation.) while Jake stayed in his cute action and romance films. Here is where I first noticed Jake could act. Is Brokeback Mountain the best film of the year?: I don't think so (I'd say A History of Violence, but I much prefer David Cronenberg to Ang Lee). Is it a great film?: absolutely. Why is it so effective? The cast is spectacular and Gyllenhaal was really the heart of the film to me. He's the superego to Heath Ledger's id and Lee uses Gyllenhaal's cute looks to match with Ledger's classic beauty in a really interesting fashion.

Massively snubbed was Jeff Daniels.

My picks
________________________
1. Jeff Daniels - The Squid and the Whale
2. Jake Gyllenhaal - Brokeback Mountain
3. William Hurt - A History of Violence
4. Matt Dillon - Crash
5. Paul Giamatti - Cinderella Man

6. Ray Wise - Good Night, and Good Luck

and since I'd feel bad not mentioning these men...

7. Val Kilmer - Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
8. Terrence Howard - Crash
9. Owen Kline - The Squid and the Whale
10. Mickey Rourke - Sin City
11. Ed Harris - A History of Violence
Last edited by ksrymy on Mon Jul 23, 2012 3:07 am, edited 3 times in total.
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald


Return to “The 8th Decade”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests