Best Supporting Actor 1980

[ITALIANO]

Fans of the split-vote theory - there are still many, though not on this board, thank God - should just think, if not of math, of Timothy Hutton. He won not only despite the fact that another actor from the same movie was also nominated, but also despite the fact that he was up against another actor of the same age and in a very similar role - troubled teenager.

Hutton is winning here, too, and I contributed to this. Not soon - I took my time. Joe Pesci is brilliant and Raging Bull, while probably not a work of art of Citizen Kane-level as some critics wrote back then, is great, and better than Redford's movie. Plus, Hutton definitely is a lead, or at least co-lead, in Ordinary People. And also, let's face it - except for his work there, he's usually been, while not exactly bad, a bit on the bland side. This happens often with very young actor when they grow up - the problem is, in Hutton's case it happened right from his very next movie. Robert Redford must certainly be partly credited for Hutton's unusually good performance - and, of course, for the excellent acting in the whole movie.

Because Timothy Hutton is very good in Ordinary People. And while I was little more than a child, I still clearly remember how sensational his turn was considered back then by the critics - and by people in general. (Judd Hirsch is also solid and very believable in a potentially cliched role of saintly psychiatrist). It's a honest, deeply felt performance. As for the movie itself, I'm not saying that it's a masterpiece or a groundbreaking effort - but it's not a tv movie either. Its themes have been often treated by tv, true, but rarely as subtly as here. If tv were really of the same quality as Ordinary People, I'd watch it more often rather than just work in it, trust me.

And, as others have said, we can always vote for Joe Pesci next time.

[The Original BJ]

NOTE: Edited in 2016 to reject category fraud.

Given how rare it is for young men to score acting nominations (at least compared to young women), it's interesting we got two in one year. Of course, I imagine that only made Michael O'Keefe's work seem less impressive by proxy. He's sensitive enough in a fairly meaty role, but I think there's a lot of phoniness in The Great Santini, and I don't think his character's torment is able to fully land because of the nature of the material.

In just a few moments, Jason Robards perfectly captures the humor, loneliness, and oddness that must have characterized someone as eccentric and reclusive as Howard Hughes in his final years. He certainly makes an impression, and his haunting work hangs over the rest of the movie. But the part isn't so sizable, and I've already voted for him twice, which is enough.

I find Ordinary People a small movie, but a pretty bracingly acted one. Judd Hirsch has the character with the least emotional fireworks, but he makes an impression nonetheless, with a smart, tough performance that never dips into sentiment. It's not such explosive work that it deserves an Oscar, but he definitely merited this mention.

Like most, I come down to the other two, and once again I'm forced to choose between the best nominated performance and the best nominated SUPPORTING performance. Unlike many here, I think Timothy Hutton is pretty clearly the lead in Ordinary People -- I also think Sutherland and Moore are leads, but if you had to single out the one character who drives the story, I think it's Hutton's. I also think the young man is extraordinary here. I first saw Ordinary People when I was about the age Hutton is in the movie, and I felt he captured so powerfully his character's struggle to deal with tragedy during the already confusing period of adolescence. His performance is so touching, tender, and lived-in, without any actorly affectations that so often plague younger actors, that it routinely brought tears to my eyes.

And then there's Pesci, in a totally different type of role. I would strongly disagree with the statement that this is a one-note performance. More likely, I'd argue that Pesci is an actor who fits a pretty limited number of roles -- he always seems to play variations on this shrill, wise-ass type. (Even in something like JFK, he was basically just the gay version of that.) But I think Martin Scorsese used him to extraordinary effect in both of his nominated performances. His Joey LaMotta is an electric creation -- funny in a completely unhinged way, and absolutely matching Robert DeNiro in any number of explosive scenes together.

It's probably more fair to pick Pesci, so I'll acknowledge that Hutton is pretty wonderful in a lead role, and go on record for Pesci as the year's best supporting actor.

[bizarre]

Joe Pesci of course. Subtle, lived-in and menacing in unique ways, a perfect component of the film's critique of masculinity.

I like that someone as young as Hutton won an Oscar in this category but I don't think he has the gravitas to really convince with his portrayal of depression. He was effective but unsurprising.

Hirsch does nothing of note. A colourless role that he doesn't try to make more interesting.

Of those who weren't nominated I would have supported a nomination for Dennis Hopper in Out of the Blue.

[LoganJ20]

easily Joe Pesci

[Snick's Guy]

Mr Hutton easily gets my vote.

[Big Magilla]

This year illustrates the opposite of what I said about 1979: in an un-bountiful year (which 1980 emphatically was), the nominations tend to be decent, because there aren't many alternatives. These nominees were the ones fairly widely predicted. (Magilla, my memory is Tommy Lee Jones was, correctly, viewed as lead actor -- the Globes nominated him there)

Perhaps, but it was one of those borderline roles that could have been nominated in either category.

[Mister Tee]

This year illustrates the opposite of what I said about 1979: in an un-bountiful year (which 1980 emphatically was), the nominations tend to be decent, because there aren't many alternatives. These nominees were the ones fairly widely predicted. (Magilla, my memory is Tommy Lee Jones was, correctly, viewed as lead actor -- the Globes nominated him there)

If I had to pick a substitute, it'd be Allen Garfield (who I think was then going by Allen Goorwitz) in The Stunt Man.

Of the nominees:

Jason Robards was solid, but his role was pretty small, except by Beatrice Straight standards.

Michael O'Keefe played well enough opposite Duvall's powerhouse performance, but in this group he was inevitably seen as the second-running anguished teen.

I honestly expected Judd Hirsch to have a more impressive career. Not that he hasn't worked steadily for four decades, but the big roles I thought were ahead for him never really materialized. He's very solid in Ordinary People.

But the race (as the voting confirms) is clearly down to the other very impressive two. There are years we've just covered ('77, '73), and several up ahead in the dreary 80s, where either one would have got my enthusiastic vote. But here I need to choose.

I assume Joe Pesci is the hipper choice, given Raging Bull's greater cachet. He was certainly a jolt of energy throughout the film -- hilariously illogical, a great sparring partner for DeNiro.

But Timothy Hutton is really moving in Ordinary People -- and I say that as someone who always viewed the film as a minor, Playhouse 90-level drama. What affect the film has on even us dissenters comes from Hutton's genuine, groping-for-answers work, and the equally fine/disgracefully overlooked Donald Sutherland performance.

Speaking of Sutherland: there are surely those who view Hutton's placement in support a category fraud, and I understand the argument. Probably you could make the case for him and Sutherland as co-leads. But for once I'm inclined to let that pass -- to view Sutherland as the lead and Hutton as a borderline supporting performance.

Tough choice, as I say, but, given that I have another, excellent opportunity to choose Pesci further down the line, I'll endorse Oscar here and go with Hutton.

[ksrymy]

I find nothing one note about Joe Pesci in Raging Bull and he easily gets my vote.

All he does is use his short man syndrome well. The only thing I remember about his performance is the more-funny-than-serious "Your mother fuckin' sucks big fuckin' elephant dicks. You got that?"

I'm with Magilla in preferring People to the massively overrated Raging Bull. I think Scorsese did a great job directing, but the screenplay falls short and De Niro quickly became the only reason I even watched it.

[Big Magilla]

I know we're not done voting yet, but if it continues like this will this be the first poll to only have to contenders accrue votes?

No, it's happened ten times before.

It happened three times in the Best Actress polling: 1931/32, 1932/33 and 1934; once in the Supporting Actress polling: 1977; four times in the Best Actor polling: 1928/29, 1970, 1971 and 1990 and twice before in the Supporting Actor polling: 1937 and 1950.

You can find the detailed information in the Other Oscar Discussions threads.

[Sabin]

I know we're not done voting yet, but if it continues like this will this be the first poll to only have to contenders accrue votes?

[mlrg]

Timothy Hutton - Ordinary People

[Reza]

Voted for Hutton.

My picks for 1980:

1. Timothy Hutton, Ordinary People
2. Joe Pesci, Raging Bull
3. Jack Thompson, Breaker Morant
4. Michael O'Keefe, The Great Santini
5. Jason Robards, Melvin and Howard

The 6th Spot: Judd Hirsh, Ordinary People

[Big Magilla]

I've always preferred Ordinary People to Raging Bull and Timothy Hutton to Joe Pesci so this is a no-brainer for me. In fact, I wouldn't have even nominated Pesci, who, as others have said, is basically one-note in Bull. Tommy Lee Jones and Levon Helm in Coal Miner's Daughter and Sam Shepard in Resurrection are the actors I would have preferred to see nominated in his stead.

The other nominated performances are all strong with Michael O'Keefe nearly as good as Hutton as the year's other senstive teenager in The Great Santini. Judd Hirsch does what Robin Williams did to win an Oscar in Good Will Hunting seventeen years later, only better. Jason Robards is marvelous as the reclusive Howard Hughes in Melvin and Howard, but Hutton, an actor who made his screen debut as a four year-old in his father's (Jim Hutton) 1965 film, Never Too Late came to his role in Ordinary People after playing a similar role in the TV movie Friendly Fire. In that one he was the neglected younger son of Carol Burnett who goes on a crusade to learn the truth about her older son's death in Vietnam. He seemed to be headed for a major career and though he's still active, it's a pity he's never head another role as challenging as Ordinary People's Conrad Jarrett.

[Sabin]

I find nothing one note about Joe Pesci in Raging Bull and he easily gets my vote.

[Precious Doll]

Joe Pesci & Michael O'Keefe are the standouts for me. I never liked Ordinary People, which felt like a better acted day time soap opera.

My choices:

1. Keith Gordon For Dressed to Kill
2. Jorge Juliao for Pixote
3. Joe Pesci for Raging Bull
4. Denholm Elliott for Bad Timing
5. Freddie Jones for The Elephant Man