Category Five: 5 Actresses Who I Can't Believe Haven't Been Nominated For An Oscar

Awhile back I wrote about five actors who I couldn’t believe had never been nominated for an Oscar. Now it’s the ladies’ turn.

It was much harder to compose this list. That can be blamed on the lack of good roles for women. Because of their scarcity, when a great role does come along and it’s performed well, the actress is generally recognized with a nomination. This isn’t to say that some great performances haven't fallen through the cracks over the years, but generally an actress with at least two exceptional roles under her belt will find herself with at least a nomination.

Therefore, it was much harder to find women with quality work that hadn’t gotten one. Of course, I’m sure they’d much rather have the problem of too many great roles to recognize them all.

#5: Blythe Danner

Notable Performances in: The Last Kiss, The Prince of Tides, The Great Santini

Finding five women was so difficult that I had to cheat a little bit with this one. While I’ve heard great things about the latter two movies (and Danner in particular), I haven’t personally seen them. In other words, I’m more or less putting her on this list because of one movie.

While that movie got heavily criticized by a number of people, I enjoyed it immensely and thought Danner was the best part of it. She plays an older woman with real problems, and that alone is enough to make her stand out. But the fact that she balances both independence and brokenness into one character makes her really stand out. If her scene on the treadmill doesn't get you, then something's wrong.

#4: Jamie Lee Curtis

Notable Performances in: Freaky Friday, A Fish Called Wanda, Trading Places

One of the biggest criticisms of the Academy is that it’s reluctant to give well-made comedies the same respect as well-made dramas. If it’s funny and doesn’t have Woody Allen’s name on it, it’s in trouble. So it should be no surprise that one of the most consistently funny actresses (whether she's being high-brow, low-brow, or somewhere in between) has never been recognized for her great work.

Kevin Kline was brilliantly hilarious in A Fish Called Wanda, as evidenced by the fact that he managed to WIN an Oscar for the role. But Curtis' performance is what held it all together. It’s her character that sets everything into motion. And its her allure that causes the other characters to do the brave, stupid, hilarious things that they do. Without her, it all falls apart.

#3: Allison Janney

Notable Performances in: Juno, Hairspray, Winter Solstice, The Hours, American Beauty

I was honestly surprised to find that Janney hadn't been nominated for an Oscar because I'm always so excited when she pops up in a film, and she steals scenes without you even knowing it, like a charming British lad pickpocket.

While she's typically more light-hearted, she can play depressed like nobody's business. Sure she didn't say much in American Beauty, but she didn't have to. She said with her eyes what Annette Bening's character had to say with a gun.

And let's not forget her great success on The West Wing. She's a pedigreed actress with exceptional talent, and given the right leading role, I've no doubt she'd get a nomination. But considering she has four Emmys sitting at home, I doubt she's too worried about it.

#2: Parker Posey

Notable Performances in: For Your Consideration, A Mighty Wind, Best in Show, The House of Yes, Waiting for Guffman

Yes, all but one of the mentioned films are directed by Christopher Guest. But if you know anything about the way he directs, that makes the performances all the more remarkable.

While she's not the only actress to give a memorable performance in his films, she got the most acclaim and was talked about around the water-cooler as the new "indie queen." Unfortunately, that never translated into an Oscar nomination.

But thanks to her performance in Best in Show, I now know the difference between a bee and a bear in a bee costume.

#1: Scarlett Johansson

Notable Performances in: The Prestige, Match Point, In Good Company, Girl with a Pearl Earring, Lost in Translation, Ghost World, The Man Who Wasn’t There, The Horse Whisperer

I had a few films in mind before I checked her credits on IMDB. Now after seeing all of her great roles, her lack of a nomination is especially surprising. Combine all of her great work with the fact that she's the type of star right out of Hollywood "golden days," (That is, a beautiful, popular woman who also happens to be a great actress.) and you'd think the Academy would eat it up.

I've no doubt that she'll get her nomination one day. Judging from her previous work, she'll continue to put out good performances. And she's just reaching the age to be able to play the most interestingly written female characters, be they original or based on actual people.

The Last Laugh

Hopefully we can all agree on two things.

1. It’s sad that Heath Ledger is no longer with us, both because of the entertainment he brought us as an actor and more so because of the tragedy of dying so young, leaving behind a grieving family and a young child who will have to grow up without a father.

2. His performance as the Joker is nothing short of mesmerizing, making it nearly impossible to see the actor behind the character.

But after that, the camps are divided. In one corner you have those that have happily jumped on the “definitely deserves an Oscar nomination” train.

On the other side are those that, while perhaps impressed with what Ledger did with the role, are saying that the word Oscar is only being tossed around because of his unfortunate passing.

The first group is accused of joining in with the massive hype, declaring it “Oscar worthy” simply because it's the popular thing to do right now. The second group is immediately called "a bunch of haters," having taken the opposite view JUST to take the opposite view.

I think there would be a similar division if Ledger was still alive. Those that didn’t think he deserved the nomination would be accused of being against comic book movies. Meanwhile, Batman fans clamoring for an Oscar nom would be considered less discerning film critics, having latched onto an above average performance in an average, awkwardly put together film. (Though you can be in a horribly structured film and still win an Oscar.)

Obviously it’s VERY early in the year to be talking about Oscars, so we’ll have to wait and see. After I’ve seen some other good supporting actor roles, I’ll make up my mind about whether or not Ledger belongs with them. And if he should be nominated, I’ll decide whether I’d vote for him over the other nominees.

The only two complaints I’ve heard about his role are that there was nothing to the character and that he had no arc. I’d like to address both of these things.

As far as the depth of the character is concerned, an actor can only do so much with what he’s given. He can add layers, but he can’t add actual backstory. That's where the writing comes in.

Now in this case, I actually LOVED how the Joker was written. You can’t really explain him, so leaving it a mystery makes it that much more frightening. But even though the Joker is fairly one-dimensional, that doesn’t make him boring. I was particularly impressed with how much depth Ledger gave to a character that really has nothing underneath the surface.

Look at two other Oscar-winning performances: Javier Bardem as Anton Chigurh and Sir Anthony Hopkins as Hannibal Lector. We know that Anton is out to collect the money and drugs, but we never learn why he’s the way he is. And the same is mostly true for Lector. Yes, the fact that he was a psychiatrist adds a bit of backstory, but his motivations and transformation is never fully explained. (This is pretending, as we should, that Hannibal Rising doesn’t exist.)

As far as an arc goes, Anton has none. I initially thought that Lector didn’t have one either, but a friend pointed out his relationship with Clarice. And this made me realize that the Joker has a similar relationship with Batman.

The Joker’s feelings for Batman grow throughout the film. Initially he just wants to kill him, but then he realizes that Batman gives him a purpose, something to fight against. This change is actually much more significant than Lector’s. Though Lector’s affection for Clarice grows along with their relationship, he knows from his first meeting that he would never want to kill her.

In addition, the Joker’s plan does escalate. Though some see this as pounding the message of the movie into the ground, I see it as the Joker’s revelation of what he is to do with his life: create chaos with as little interference as possible to show just how close the world was to going there on its own.

Though these are worthy criteria, I’m more inclined to judge a great performance by how much it affects me and by how much the actor ceases to be an actor and becomes the character. I’m dying to see the movie again simply to watch the Joker, since I can’t get some of his lines out of my head. While they were great lines for the most part, I can't imagine reading them on paper would have anywhere near the same effect as hearing Ledger speak them.

Add to that the aura of mystery that will forever surround this character since he’s not around to answer endless questions about his technique. While it doesn’t make Lector any less engaging, it is comical to learn that Hopkins created the voice by combining Truman Capote and Katherine Hepburn. We know Ledger dug deep (too deep, it seems) to form this character, but never knowing the full extent of that does make it more appealing, at least to me.

And I only realized the full transformation that Ledger made the other night. I was picturing the scene where his makeup is thinnest, which I believe is the interrogation scene. I tried to imagine wiping that makeup away to reveal the real Ledger underneath. And finally, it hit me. I was looking at the poster for A Knight’s Tale, and the true transformation that Ledger made really hit home.

The Joker isn’t Heath Ledger with makeup. Heath Ledger is the Joker WITHOUT makeup.

Category Five: 5 Actors Who I Can't Believe Haven't Been Nominated For An Oscar

You know the old saying: "It's an honor just to be nominated." Obviously, it’s more of an honor to win, but for the most part, I think these statements are genuine. In the acting categories especially, there's often a favorite to win. If you aren't that favorite, you should still be pretty happy of the fact that you were in the running with them. In the end, you are still being hailed as great.

Still, it must not feel great to lose, especially if you are nominated lots of times and never get to take home the statuette. "Oscar nominee" just doesn't have quite the same ring to it as "Oscar winner."

But what about those that don't even get nominated? There have been numerous performances that deserved a nomination; however, I understand the selection is limited. Sometimes a great performance doesn't make the cut.

So instead of dwelling on specific performances, I'm going to talk about five performers that I'm shocked have yet to receive a nomination despite their numerous worthy performances. I'm not necessarily saying they deserved to be nominated for each of these roles, but I provide them as an example of their body of work.

#5: Dennis Quaid

Notable Performances in: In Good Company, Far From Heaven, The Rookie, Traffic, Wyatt Earp

Unfortunately I think most people know Quaid as the ex-husband of Meg Ryan. That’s a shame because he’s a very talented actor and continues to mix up commercial films with interesting fair, occasionally combining the two.

Other than his exceptional portrayal of Doc Holliday,[1] he excels at playing the “every man.” What keeps that from being generic is that he is the every man searching for what comes next in his life. That might be returning to an old love or confessing a new one, but either way, he wants something more out of life.

Of particular note is his role in Far From Heaven, where he plays a closeted homosexual husband. He brings a quiet passion to the role, and the entire time, there’s a pain behind his eyes. It’s never quite clear whether he’s upset at what he’s done to his wife or at himself for not having the courage to be who he really is.


#4: Bruce Willis

Notable Performances in: Twelve Monkeys, The Sixth Sense, Unbreakable, Sin City, 16 Blocks

In the late 80's to early 90's, there was a boom of action stars that we haven't seen since. Many faded away. One is busy running California.

Of all of these stars, Willis stands out for one particular reason: He's actually a good actor.[2]

Even as John McClaine, he has great comic timing. You laugh at him not because he kills bad guys and follows it up with an atrocious pun[3] but because he's genuinely funny.

And he has range. Along with his other action roles, he's played goofy, crazy, and depressed.

That last one is where I'd like to focus. In a way, all five of the notable roles that I mentioned are similar characters: depressed, hallowed-out, searching for meaning in life. Willis plays this type of role so well because there's something disarming about seeing him depressed. It doesn't feel natural for him not to be smiling, so you immediately sympathize with him.

I’m especially surprised he wasn’t recognized for The Sixth Sense. Toni Collette and Haley Joel Osment give great performances, but Willis is the anchor of the film. It’s his relationship with the boy that brings about the powerful scenes between mother and son.

And that world famous twist wouldn’t have worked if not for the horror Willis conveyed at realizing the truth: The only way he could help his wife was to finally let go.

#3: Guy Pearce

Notable Performances in: The Proposition, The Count of Monte Cristo, Memento, L.A. Confidential

Maybe it’s because of The Proposition (and his attachment to The Road), but when I think of Pearce, I think of “grit.” He’s not a guy I’d want to mess with.

And yet, behind that grit, there’s a perpetual longing to find answers to his questions. More often than not, the answers he seeks are about his own mind and moral compass.

Can he bring himself to kill? Is he happy with what he’s become? How important is the truth?

Grittiness may be a part of his performances now, but it was noticeable absent from his role in L.A. Confidential, where he played a straight-laced, by the book detective that waits until the end of the film to make the right (not the legal) decision.

Maybe if that role had come after all the others, people would have seen how talented he was.

#2: John Cusack

Notable Performances in: Grace is Gone, High Fidelity, Being John Malkovich, Grosse Point Blank, say anything…

Perhaps Cusack was before his time. He was quirky when quirky wasn’t cool.[4] Really, Lloyd Dobler is no different than Juno[5] (seemingly mature for their age but having striking moments of vulnerability; having a plan and sticking to it despite what outsiders think; not a part of the “in” crowd but still far from a loser).

But while Juno deals with a pregnancy, all Lloyd does during say anything… is fall in love and do whatever it takes to stay in love.[6] Yet by the time the film is over, you feel as if you know him better than some people you actually went to school with.

Even when playing a nostalgic hitman or a earnest puppeteer, Cusack brings a serious intensity to his roles that makes you momentarily forget about the absurdity going on around him. Or, in the best moments, connect with him on an emotional level despite the events being unrealistic.

#1: Jim Carrey

Notable Performances in: Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, Man on the Moon, The Truman Show

I don’t list as many notable performances for Carrey simply because he doesn’t have that many. But he takes the number one spot on this list because he should have been nominated for each of them.

He’s the only actor to win back-to-back Best Actor awards at the Golden Globes and yet not receive an Academy Award nomination.

I honestly don’t know what more they want from him. First he played a subdued version of his persona in The Truman Show, a likeable goofball who just happens to be the center of a reality show all about him.[7] While it’s definitely a comedy, Carrey avoids the manic actions of his normal routine, keeping Truman on an even keel until he discovers the truth of his situation. His reaction to the information, and the choice he makes once he knows, stick with me each time I see it.

He followed this up with a spot-on portrayal of Andy Kaufman. There were a few juggernauts in the running for Best Actor that year, but I’ll continue to be baffled at how Carrey slipped through the cracks. Forget the fact that he becomes Kaufman, and just look at the range showed in the film itself: anger, sadness, pure joy, depression, etc.

The only possible explanation is that people thought it wasn’t that far of a stretch from his own bizarre personality. He then blew that out of the water by playing one of the meekest love interests of recent years in Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, a hapless (and hopeless) romantic that just wants to love, and when that doesn’t work, just wants to not hurt anymore.

If the pain and suffering he shows after love’s gone bad doesn’t get you, and the emptiness he portrays as he realizes he’s about to lose the only thing he has left of love doesn’t get you, then just wait until the end where he decides to go through all the pain all over again just for the chance to love.

Carrey shouldn’t just have been nominated by now; he should have a couple of Oscars on his mantle. Right next to a picture of him talking through his ass.

---

[1] This role was overshadowed by Val Kilmer’s fantastic take on the same character in the previous year’s Tombstone. If you forced me to pick between the performances, I would go with Kilmer.

[2] Yes, Stallone was nominated for a Best Actor Oscar for his role in the original Rocky, a damn fine movie. But his performance in First Blood shows his limited range. Rambo is really just Rocky with a (more pronounced?) mental disorder.

[3] Sure, I’m guilty of laughing at these from time to time, but I would never call them well-acted.

[4] Which is what made him cool.

[5] Except, I would argue, MUCH more believable.

[6] Actually, now that I think about it, that is a pretty big deal. And the film treats it as such.

[7] This film has only gotten more relevant.