Best Actor 1973

1927/28 through 1997

Who was the Best Actor of 1973?

Marlon Brando - Last Tango in Paris
20
37%
Jack Lemmon - Save the Tiger
0
No votes
Jack Nicholson - The Last Detail
26
48%
Al Pacino - Serpico
7
13%
Robert Redford - The Sting
1
2%
 
Total votes: 54

Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Mister Tee »

So, with Nicholson not eligible till the following year, pickings behind Brando/Pacino were relatively slim.

Much as I admire Ryan, I find his performance over-the-top declamatory; I prefer Fredric March's plaintive "What have you done to the booze, Hickey?". Ryan's death early in the year had, however, made him a sentimental favorite.

The three votes for Jack Lemmon probably mean one first place vote on the weighted ballot...and reminds one that, along with a bunch of hipper critics, the National Society did also employ Rex Reed.
Mike Kelly
Temp
Posts: 256
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 9:59 pm
Location: Melbourne, FL, USA

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Mike Kelly »

For those interested, here's the National Society of Film Critics voting breakdown for Best Actor, 1973

Marlon Brando - Last Tango in Paris - 31 points - Winner

Robert Ryan - The Iceman Cometh - 15 points (he also received 5 points in the Supporting Actor vote)

Al Pacino - Serpico - 12 points

Robert De Niro - Mean Streets - 10 points (he also received 21 points and won their Supporting Actor Award)

Sergio Corrieri - Memories of Underdevelopment - 6 points

Harvey Keitel - Mean Streats - 5 points

Charles Chaplin - A King in New York - 4 points
Jeff Bridges - The Last American Hero - 4 points

Yves Montand - Cesar and Rosalie - 3 points
Elliot Gould - The Long Goodbye - 3 points
Hans Hirschumuller - The Merchant of Four Seasons - 3 points
Rip Torn - Payday - 3 points
Jack Lemmon - Save the Tiger - 3 points

George Segal - A Touch of Class - 2 points

Gian Maria Volonte - The Mattei Affair - 1 point
Robert Blake - Electra Glide in Blue - 1 point
Donald Pleasence - Wedding in White - 1 point
Paul Rogers - The Homecoming - 1 point
James Caan - Cinderella Liberty - 1 point
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Okri »

Oh, probably. But I think that A Clockwork Orange/Cries and Whispiers/Taxi Driver/Barry Lyndon would've been too much to expect the academy of today to nominate, so I'd like to pretend that they might have went for it.

But moreover, it just seems like support for any of the films this year was palpably soft
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Mister Tee »

27 years later, a $100 million grosser like Crouching Tiger was too much for the Academy to vote best picture, so it's hard to imagine the far less impactful Day for Night actually winning, whatever the subject matter. A nomination, fresh off the NY Critics' prize, was far more possible, though I wonder if having it and Cries and Whispers going up together might have caused them to cannibalize one another's support.

This year's lead acting choices were indeed the worst of the decade -- I let out pained groans at each of the two. But you do quote me correctly, that being disappointed about the acting contest outcomes was something of a regular feature of the Oscars in that era. There was almost a passion play aspect to it -- that actors were required to endure one or many losses, some painful, before being allowed to receive the prize. And it often seemed like the better the actor was, the longer the wait. And, of course, actors had it easy compared to the directors, who either waited decades (Polanski, Scorsese) or never won at all (Altman, Kubrick).

My take on why American Graffiti is far superior to The Sting or The Exorcist (reflecting much of the critics' consensus at the time): The Sting and The Exorcist are standard Hollywood commercial offerings -- plenty enjoyable on their own terms, but not exactly works of depth. American Graffiti on first glance might appear the same, given that its form was lifted from lightweight teenage comedies of a decade prior...but the film was only shallow on the surface. For most of us, it carried a strong subtext, one that you may have to have grown up in America in that time to fully appreciate. The film is set in 1962, shortly before the Kennedy assassination, which was a pivotal event in most of our lives -- it seemed to lead, in short order, to Vietnam, the Watts riots, more assassinations...finally a general sense that a post-World War II period of ease and tranquility had been irrevocably shattered (in a way that lingers to this day). The characters who populate American Graffiti seemed to us to be living out the last night of an enchanted childhood, one that was about to be wiped out and virtually forgotten. Lucas and company did an artful job of analogizing this loss of American innocence (however naive the innocence may have been) to the normal feeling the late adolescent experiences at stepping out into the adult world, and finding it a far different, often more threatening place than his or her upbringing suggested. Even the most comical events of the night depicted in the film have their dark undertones, and some of the characters have inklings of what's ahead for them -- notably John Milner, who articulates his sense that his days as king of the drag race are coming to an end. This was then highlighted with the film's finale -- title cards that appeared telling us the fate of the four guys (Milner killed in a crash; Terry the Toad MIA in Vietnam). God knows this just-before-the-credits gimmick has since been used to death, but back then it was the first time the device had ever appeared in a fiction film (it was most familiar from Dragnet), and it ended the film on a note of mild shock. (I do think it's a valid criticism, made in that early-stages-of-feminism era, that Lucas & co. made a stupid, sexist mistake by not including the main female characters in the update)

Obviously, none of this is going to make you love a film you don't love, but it's my explanation for why it holds a much stronger place in my heart than the films that dominated the Oscars that year.
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Okri »

Tee mentioned a while ago (years probably) that despite the often respectable victories in best picture (even if they weren't his favourite) that sometimes the 70's oscars were a dispiriting affair, pointing to the acting categories (specifically this year) as one of the reasons.

Firstly, I'm a little surprised to hear that the critical coalition/audience response went to American Graffiti. Truthfully, I view that film, The Sting and The Exorcist about the same - all passable entertainment. You've gotta wonder if Day For Night (which took both New York and National Society this year) was actually released in LA, it would've been able to pip the rest for a nomination/win (it's about moviemaking after all), whereas next year it had a little bit of old news to it (that, and 1974 was nutty strong).

I wish Gene Hackman was nominated this year. I really like Scarecrow. And, like Sabin, I'd cheat and include Badlands (by far my favourite Malick movie) this year,

I went with Brando for reasons already articulated.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19319
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Big Magilla »

Bertolucci and Brando were pretty much locks but I don't think Tango ever had a shot at Best Picture. Too depressing, too shocking for the old guard. Serpico, I thought did, but it was probably too New York for the died in the wool Southern California crowd to consider. Like, Tee, I always found A Touch of Class, which had none, a real head-scratcher of a nominee. I think despite the negatives from certain quarters, The Exorcist mght have won had Friedkin, who was already being seen as too full of himself, hadn't won over Kubrick and Bogdanovich two years earlier. Even so, they could have given his film a Best Picture win and the Best Director prize to someone else, but who? The Sting was not only seen as a pleasant alternative, but as a relevant social phenomenon of the day. It had created a nostalgic interest in and revival of ragtime music, even if its use in the 1930s set film was anachronistic. Ragtime had been popular from 1897-1918 - Irving Berlin's "Alexander's Ragtime Band" was a hit in 1911, but the film popularized it all over again.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Sabin »

I always assumed that Last Tango in Paris was more of a contender.

My God, had this coalition converged around American Graffiti (still great!), we might be seeing The Sting AND A Touch of Class out in the cold, thus allowing for Last Tango in Paris to join the Best Picture circle and what? Serpico?

Best Picture Winner American Graffiti followed by:
Cries and Whispers
The Exorcist
Last Tango in Paris
Serpico

I can live with that indeed.
"How's the despair?"
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Mister Tee »

Sabin, one minor correction: though Badlands opened at the NY Film Festival in fall 1973, it wasn't exhibited until February '74, so was not considered part of 1973.

To your main point, though, about the strength of the overall year: I may be partially reflecting the view of the times, where (as I chronicled in that Spielberg thread) there wasn't nearly so much separation between critical and commercial success. Sure, there was always some film that got wide critical approval but didn't cash in -- Alice's Restaurant, Medium Cool, The Virgin and the Gypsy, Slaughterhouse-Five, Fat City. (Saddest of all: Milos Forman's American debut Taking Off, which got widespread raves but died, and is now essentially forgotten) Thing is, these films were generally ignored in the Oscar race, because there were always plenty others that had both critical and box-office endorsement -- MASH and Five Easy Pieces, Clockwork Orange and Last Picture Show, Cabaret, Deliverance and The Godfather.

In 1973, that didn't happen: Mean Streets and Bang the Drum Slowly were serious critical favorites that died (Scarecrow, despite its Cannes win, was more middlingly reviewed); Last Tango in Paris was, by subject matter, art house-confined; nothing seemed to hit the reviews-and-revenue sweet spot except American Graffiti -- which wasn't viewed as lightweight by critics (it finished just behind Day for Night in NY Critics voting), and seemed to me the logical best picture winner. I was startled when, instead, in the end it turned into a one-on-one between The Sting and The Exorcist.

I find The Sting a pleasant enough if bland effort, but the optics of a film basically designed as a package to cash in on Butch Cassidy winning best picture irritated me. You're probably right, though, that it won primarily as a Block-The-Exorcist vehicle. Everyone had assumed all year The Exorcist would be in best picture contention -- the combination of its phenomenal best-seller status with Friedkin's career heat made it seem a sure thing. But, as some may know, the film had massive production problems, and had gone literally unscreened for critics until opening day, December 26th. I saw it that day in NY, and the crowds were, unsurprisingly, overflow; the film was an immediate commercial sensation. But critical reaction was, at least in elite circles, startlingly negative -- Canby in the Times and Pauline Kael both excoriated the film. There was also substantial repulsion among the older Hollywood crowd, led by George Cukor, at the film's Gothic effects. The combination of these probably led to a coalition that pushed The Sting into the winner's circle. Why they couldn't have united around American Graffiti instead is beyond me. But The Sting was an enormous box office success -- it went toe-to-toe with The Exorcist's gross -- and Graffiti was, by then, slightly fading news (it had opened in August).

To this day I can't fathom how At Touch of Class got that best picture nod. It wasn't even much of a box office success (somehow, the no-money-no-nominations rule didn't apply to retro crud, as both Class and Save the Tiger proved). I'd had Serpico as a more likely nominee, with Paper Moon near behind.

As far as the Globes -- they were hit and miss in that era as far as predicting the Oscars. It was rare for the best picture winner to not even get a nomination, but it's not like most Oscar voters acknowledged even watching the Globes at the time. (If, in fact, they could: the show wasn't always telecast)
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Greg »

I would just like to add that even though the Academy probably would have never voted to give Brando the award after he refused it the year before, it could have been quite interesting to see what happened if Brando won. Considering the subject matter of Last Tango In Paris, would he this year have sent up a nearly-naked-American-Indian impostor carrying a stick of butter?
ITALIANO
Emeritus
Posts: 4076
Joined: Mon Jan 06, 2003 1:58 pm
Location: MILAN

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by ITALIANO »

Yes, Jack Lemmon's win - especially in such a race, with at least three great actors at their best - is a bit of a question mark, especially considering not only that the movie is completely forgotten today (even I only remember two scenes from it) but also that, I guess, it hadn't been such a big hit even back then. But of course the man was popular, and this was a dramatic role from an actor mostly known for comedies - a trick which often works.

I can understand those who voted for Jack Nicholson - it's a very good performance. I can also understand those who voted for Al Pacino - a bit less, but I can.

Or I could. If Marlon Brando weren't here, I mean. Because if acting is an art, as I think it is, Brando's performance in Last Tango is certainly one of its highest examples - at least in the medium called cinema. It contains everything that defines Art - including the combination of technique (and the knowledge of technique) and emotions. It's a performance of such power, such intelligence, such courage, that leaves one shocked with admiration and, almost, fear. It should be studied in acting schools - except that it can't: it's too unique, it couldn't be imitated. I'd be tempted to say that this is what happens when an immense and very American actor finds a great and very European intellectual to guide him - unfortunately, though, the result isn't always this good (I'd say that Burt Lancaster in The Leopard is a comparable triumph). It happened this time, and we are lucky that movies, unlike stage plays, are lasting documents and Last Tango and Brando's turn are here to be seen and appreciated. For years, of course, this wasn't possible in my (and Bertolucci's) country. My parents had been among those Italians who, knowing the way Italian censorship worked those days, went to see the movie when it came out, before all copies were burned and destroyed (at least officially; definitely not publicly shown). The movie became legendary here even for this reason - yet while often legends prove disappointing once you verify them, when Last Tango in Paris was finally alllowed again in our cinemas - I was a teenager - I found it as powerful as I expected and, excet maybe for the Jean-Pierre Leaud parts, not dated at all. Americans, by the way, must be credited for having recognized this movie as a work of art when they first saw it - that they ended up giving their Oscar to Jack Lemmon for a minor film was a clear act of cowardice.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Sabin »

Normally if I've missed one and by all accounts it is a bad performance or not a particularly worthy one, I'll just vote anyway. I haven't seen Jack Lemmon's performance in Save the Tiger. Pretty much everybody seems to be in agreement that it's not a terribly good piece of work, by Lemmon standards, Academy standards that year, and Academy standards overall. So, I'll participate in lieu of that oversight.

Robert Redford is good in The Sting, a movie that's now a little underrated. A film like The Sting has no business winning sandwiched between the two Godfather films, Midnight Cowboy, and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. But it's not a bad piece of entertainment at all. I see that it wasn't nominated for the Dramatic Golden Globe and it was cited by the DGA. Was this at all a surprise? Or was it a converging anti-Exorcist coalition? Had Friedkin managed to win two Oscars damn near back-to-back, he would likely be the Academy's biggest oddity, a What-the-fuck-happened-to-this-guy? oddity that would warrant explanation. Hill is a reasonably talented craftsman and The Sting is fun. I agree with Tee that nothing Redford has done particularly warrants attention for his acting, but he is a talented matinee idol who sought out mostly strong material throughout the 70's and should be remembered fondly.

More of a tangent, but I'm fascinated by Mister Tee's reading of 1973 as a somewhat disappointing year when so many of my favorite movies of the decade came from '73. Mean Streets. Badlands. Scarecrow. Bombs all, and likely not even considered in elevating the standard of the nominees this year, but wasn't this seen as a crop of nominees that were not indicative of the year as a whole? Bergman represented the Foreign Guard, and one that would be previously lauded at crix award and carried over, a phenomenon that would be absolutely wonderful if it could happen today, with films like The Lives of Others continuing strong until next year (and that would be one that totally would). American Graffiti represented the New Guard. Light as a feather, but young. The Exorcist represented the New Guard in the process of becoming the Old Guard, a young buck filmmaker established and reaping unparalleled success. And The Sting was The Old Guard. What does that make A Touch of Class? The Old, Old Guard? Or the Dolittle Guard? I've always had trouble imagining prognosticators calling much going for The Sting before the nominations came out. What of The Way We Were, Serpico, Last Tango in Paris, The Last Detail, etc?

I like Al Pacino in Serpico just fine, but he gave a better performance that year in Scarecrow, which should have seen Gene Hackman get a nomination. Wonderful film. Al Pacino has one of his best performed scenes in Serpico. When his fellow officers mistake him for a perp and back him into a corner. Had the entire film that level of energy, we might be talking about a masterpiece. Instead it's pretty overrated. Good, but overrated. Really woulda been nice to see Al Pacino win this year, or next, and save us an embarrassment to come. I will be voting for him in two years, so it's not terribly pressing now.

It's really down to Marlon Brando and Jack Nicholson. One man coming into his own as a leading man playing the complicated pricks that the other man is re-defining one last time. I've always had a problem with Last Tango in Paris, and that is I don't know what my problem is. The film has lasted, y'know? It's stayed very much strong in peoples' minds, I think. And whatever debate it spawned has eclipsed into mass appreciation. "Oh, it's Last Tango in Paris!" Even the title evokes something magical that the film seems in opposition to. I think my biggest problem with the film is that it allows Paul to be martyred as if there is something glorious to what he is doing, when it's really quite sad. Alluring, passionate, passionless, human...sure. But it's also sad. And when I watch Marlon Brando in this role...I'm really just watching Marlon Brando in this role. I don't feel like I'm watching a real character. I'm watching an improvisatory exercise. I'd like to watch the film again. I think I find the unsure spectacle more as a revelatory whole than as a single performance. This is damning Brando with faint praise. I wasn't there in '73, so I can't know.

I mention that I feel like I'm always watching Marlon Brando in that role. I think the last time I felt like I wasn't just watching Jack Nicholson was in The Pledge. And before that? I don't know. Chinatown? One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest? Here? Calling The Last Detail his "Cagney" performance is like calling Marlon Brando's performance in Last Tango in Paris his "Brando" performance, because you can see him being Brando in every frame of the film. Just as I wasn't there in '73 to know what it was like to see Last Tango in Paris, I can't know what it was like to watch Jack Nicholson leap from Five Easy Pieces to The Last Detail, but I doubtlessly must have thought "This sonovabitch is the greatest actor that we have right now!" I have other choices ahead of me, but every time I watch The Last Detail, I feel like I'm watching "what this actor does" (just like Last Tango) and I'm not noticing the brush-strokes. I'm watching something that will become caricature for him in a few years, but it certainly is not now.

There is no crime in not winning an Oscar this year. Unless you're Jack Lemmon, I guess.
"How's the despair?"
MovieFan
Graduate
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 5:40 am

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by MovieFan »

Its a close one between Pacino and Brando for me, but I think Pacino had the more consistent characterisation.

Im suprised so many disliked Lemmon, I agree he should never had won it, but I didnt think he was bad, he did tend to go overboard. Gene Hackman should have been nominated for his brilliant work in Scarecrow, really underrated performance
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3285
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Greg »

I saw both Serpico and Save The Tiger on TV and both Last Tango In Paris and The Sting in theater revivals. I have not seen The Last Detail.

After reading the comments of others regarding Marlin Brando's performance, I feel like I should watch it again to check if I missed something. The reason I have considered Brando's performance to be somewhat overrated is that, while I think he is quite effective in what he does, I fail to see much of the point for his character and therby his performance. I think that Elizabeth Taylor gave a great performance in Who's Afraid Of Virginia Woolf? because, even though she and Richard Burton continually berated and abused each other, they led the viewers along a story that eventually led to a reconciliation and reason for their abuses. Brando and Schneider's relationship struck me more as simply wallowing in despair and that is it.

I do agree with others in that I think Lemmon's performance is largely grating histrionics and that Redford, while good, did not have enough to do to warrant an award.

My vote goes to Pacino, more so than anything else for the marriage of toughness in his on-duty scenes with the tenderness of his off-duty scenes.

If I had my way, I would boost John Houseman from supporting to lead for The Paper Chase and give him Best Actor. I find his portrayal of Professor Kingsfield an iconic exapmple of a tough teacher that still has humanity without resorting to having him eventually lighten up.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19319
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by Big Magilla »

Reza wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:
Mister Tee wrote:You're moving, Magilla? Permanently? I knew you said you were travelling, but I had no idea. Where to, on the east coast?
Brick, NJ, the safest city in America pop. 75,000 or more since 2006.
Wow, I had no idea you were moving. Have you sold your lovely house in / near San Francisco that Samina and I visited in 2003?
It doesn't close until the 30th, but yes. It's all moving very fast. I don't even have a closing date on the Jersey property yet, but am trying to work a deal to rent per diem if we can't get it done on the 1st of July.

Furniture pick-up is next Tuesday, car pick-up on Wednesay, closing Thursday morning, flight out Thursday night. I won't have my computer from Tuesday morning until who knows when, but will have internet access via my cell phone and will be able to use my brother's computer in New Jersey until mine is set up, but that will all be sporadic.
mlrg
Associate
Posts: 1747
Joined: Tue Dec 07, 2004 11:19 am
Location: Lisbon, Portugal

Re: Best Actor 1973

Post by mlrg »

Jack Nicholson - The Last Detail
Post Reply

Return to “The Damien Bona Memorial Oscar History Thread”