Your Oscar Ballot - Best Supporting Actor

Your Oscar Ballot - Best Supporting Actor

Matt Damon
0
No votes
Woody Harrelson
4
18%
Christopher Plummer
3
14%
Stanley Tucci
1
5%
Christoph Waltz
14
64%
 
Total votes: 22

mlrg
Adjunct
Posts: 1100
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Postby mlrg » Fri Mar 05, 2010 6:41 pm

Waltz

User avatar
OscarGuy
Site Admin
Posts: 12534
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 12:22 am
Location: Springfield, MO
Contact:

Postby OscarGuy » Fri Mar 05, 2010 7:37 am

I have not seen Plummer, but of the remaining four, toss Matt Damon for sure. He has an accent. Woo! Such a great performance that...toss him.

Stanley Tucci isn't that great in The Lovely Bones, nor is he that spectacular in Julie & Julia, though it's an improvement. I haven't been impressed with him since The Devil Wears Prada (not along ago, but still).

Between Waltz and Harrelson, I've never gotten the absolute adoration of Waltz. There's more subtlety at work from Eric Roth in the film. But, we all know that Waltz gives a showboaty performance and sticks with it throughout. I won't begrudge him that, but the male actors in the film shouldn't have been recognized over the females, because there's just no comparison.

Harrelson is very good in The Messenger. I won't say perfect, because he's not, but he does bring a level of honesty and gruffness to his character that works for it. The underlying sympathy and insecurity comes out at the right times and it's one of those performances that often get overlooked because it's not overzealous. So, my vote went to Woody.
Wesley Lovell
"Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." - Benjamin Franklin

ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 3955
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN
Contact:

Postby ITALIANO » Fri Mar 05, 2010 6:14 am

This is one of those categories where I shouldn't vote, as I haven't seen The Last Station. And on paper, let's be honest, Christopher Plummer has probably the greatest role ever given to an actor - getting to play one of the most important artists in the history of mankind would be any actor's dream. (Tolstoi is like God for Russians, yet interestingly - or maybe for this reason - as far as I know they never made a movie about him, with the exception of a not-very-good one in the 80s, and maybe something else but really nothing memorable). I hope Plummer (and, though I have my doubts, Michael Hoffman) gave him the treatment he deserves.

I will still vote though, and of those I have seen it's clearly between Waltz and Harrelson. Waltz is obviously a talented actor; if he changes moods during the movie - from scary to clownish, etc - it's because of the character and the way it's written, and the fact that Waltz can still create a character despite these contradictions is an accomplishment in itself. It's one of those pleasantly showy performances, and showiness, especially in a not-realistic picture, has its good reasons sometimes. (And Damien, I think this is exactly, unlike Ralph Fiennes, the kind of Nazi the Academy would love to vote for).

But it's also true that Woody Harrelson is one of the best American actors around. Always original, never predictable, never playing the same characters and always finding unusual (and not necessarily pleasant) aspects in the characters he's given - this is certainly a unique, one-of-a-kind performer, a truly committed one. He's also, unfortunately, the kind of actor who never wins an Oscar.

I will still pick Waltz here, but it's not an easy choice.

Reza
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 7933
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Postby Reza » Fri Mar 05, 2010 5:24 am

Voted for Waltz but I have yet to see the performances of both Harrelson and Plummer.



Edited By Reza on 1267784706

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Fri Mar 05, 2010 4:01 am

Sabin wrote:Nope. You don't get a miracle.

Waltz wins. Yay, secular humanist rock floating in space.

But truth be told It's an entertaining but lousy performance.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell

Sabin
Laureate
Posts: 7352
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Postby Sabin » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:44 am

Nope. You don't get a miracle.

Waltz wins. Yay, secular humanist rock floating in space.
"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

User avatar
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Postby Damien » Fri Mar 05, 2010 3:40 am

Woody Harrelson is wonderful in The Messenger and he received my vote. But, please God!!!! let there be a miracle and Waltz not win!!
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell

Snick's Guy
Temp
Posts: 316
Joined: Sat Nov 20, 2004 6:43 pm
Location: Colorado Springs, CO

Postby Snick's Guy » Thu Mar 04, 2010 10:46 pm

if you had an oscar ballot, who would you be voting for best supporting actor?


Return to “82nd Nominations and Winners”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest