Best Supporting Actor 2009

Who should have won Best Supporting Actor of 2009?

Matt Damon - Invictus
0
No votes
Woody Harrelson - The Messenger
9
29%
Christopher Plummer - The Last Station
0
No votes
Stanley Tucci - The Lovely Bones
2
6%
Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
20
65%
 
Total votes: 31

FilmFan720
Emeritus
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by FilmFan720 »

I really shouldn't have voted here, because I still have not checked out The Last Station. Still, I can't imagine Christopher Plummer surpassing Christoph Waltz this year (and I will vote for Plummer in a few days) so I went ahead and voted anyways. So sue me.

Nothing much to say here that hasn't already been covered. I agree with the consensus on a lot of this work, and also with the also-rans who should have been nominated. The only other name I will throw out is Denis Minochet, whose opening scene to Inglorious Basterds is a master class.

My five:

1. Christoph Waltz, Inglorious Basterds
2. Christian McKay, Me and Orson Welles
3. Alfred Molina, An Education
4. Peter Capaldi, In the Loop
5. Denis Minochet, Inglorious Basterds
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
Jim20
Temp
Posts: 337
Joined: Thu Jan 30, 2003 7:54 pm
Location: Pasadena, CA
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Jim20 »

My shouldabeen line-up, with Waltz my default choice.

SUPPORTING ACTOR
Christian Friedel, The White Ribbon
James Gandolfini, Where the Wild Things Are
Woody Harrelson, The Messenger
Alfred Molina, An Education
**Christoph Waltz, Inglourious Basterds**
bizarre
Assistant
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by bizarre »

Sabin wrote:
Okri wrote
Right, but I can imagine Bridges, Freeman, Firth and Clooney being nominated in any solid to great year. I can't imagine Plummer or Tucci or even Harrelson making it a solid year.
I can't imagine a single Best Actress nominee making it in either. The only performances that would make it in amidst a great year are Waltz and Mo'Nique.
I'm not sure that Sidibe's "whoah, she doesn't look like a movie star but she can act?!?!?!?!" story would have flown in a really packed year, but I think Mulligan could have still scored ingenue votes and Streep would have been up there regardless.

Mirren would not have factored in at all and, ironically, I think the winner would have been snubbed, too. Big B.O. is only a deciding factor in a race like this when there's a dearth of 'viable' options.

I think 2009 was an INCREDIBLY strong year for world film AND for performances - too bad so few of them were in the consideration for Stateside prizes. It is telling that I was predicting Emily Blunt (surprise showing for a film that no one seemed too enthusiastic about) and Abbie Cornish (no precursor support whatsoever) for the two runner-up slots. After that, who knows - Tilda Swinton or Michelle Monaghan in completely unseen critical hits? Saoirse Ronan or Hilary Swank for critical bombs? Audrey Tautou or Shohreh Aghdashloo to satisfy the foreign-language contingent? Even Marion Cotillard or Mélanie Laurent who would have been expected to make more of a dent in the supporting voting?

There was absolutely no one else in actor. Early predictions factored in people like Hal Holbrook or Sam Rockwell whose films were acclaimed but never went anywhere awards-wise, Viggo Mortensen and Daniel Day-Lewis whose films/perfs failed either financially or critically, and Michael Stuhlbarg who was always a 'niche' vote. Tobey Maguire's random Globes citation was a case of too little, too late (same could be said for Brothers' campaign). I don't remember anyone else being in the conversation and, like 2006, we ended up with a pretty concrete five before nominations were announced.
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Sabin »

Okri wrote
Right, but I can imagine Bridges, Freeman, Firth and Clooney being nominated in any solid to great year. I can't imagine Plummer or Tucci or even Harrelson making it a solid year.
I can't imagine a single Best Actress nominee making it in either. The only performances that would make it in amidst a great year are Waltz and Mo'Nique.
"How's the despair?"
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10031
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Reza »

Voted for Waltz.

My picks for 2009:

1.Christian McKay, Me and Orson Welles
2. Christophe Waltz, Inglourious Basterds
3. Christopher Plummer, The Last Station
4. Alfred Molina, An Education
5 Jake Gyllenhaal, Brothers

The 6th Spot: Stanley Tucci, Julie and Julia
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Okri »

Sabin wrote:
Okri wrote
I was disappointed that Anthony Mackie kept getting overlooked everywhere for his taciturn performance in The Hurt Locker (especially since Renner was able to sneak through in a much more competitive category). But most of my favourites were from films that were way, way off AMPAS radar.
A nomination for Mackie would have been great, but I don't remember Best Actor being that competitive that year. Although Tobey Maguire was nominated for the Dramatic Globe for Brothers alongside Bridges, Clooney, Firth, and Freeman, I thought that Renner was a sure thing for a SAG nom and he was. I recall those five being pretty locked up early on with scattered talk of Matt Damon for The Informant and Daniel Day-Lewis for Nine ending the minute Downey Jr. won for Sherlock Holmes, and Viggo Mortensen weirdly never begun to figure into the race for The Road. I was pretty sold on the eventual five for Best Actor by the end of December.
Right, but I can imagine Bridges, Freeman, Firth and Clooney being nominated in any solid to great year. I can't imagine Plummer or Tucci or even Harrelson making it a solid year.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8637
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Mister Tee »

We covered all this so recently I feel like whatever I write here will strike everyone as me just repeating myself. However, for the record...

Christoph Waltz's romp through the precursors made him an easy and deserving Oscar winner. But it also assured about the weakest, least deserving group of co-nominees we've seen in many a moon. I was very much anticipating, before the season got underway, that Alfred Molina and Anthony Mackie would represent (I in fact saw Mackie as more likely to score a Hurt Locker nod than Jeremy Renner). Christian McKay and peter Capaldi were late-arriving hopefuls. Instead, Oscar gave us this motley crew.

I think what happened was this: the Waltz sweep of the important critics' prizes meant no other candidates got any traction. Had McKay or Capaldi won at NY/National/LA, instead of running second-third, they might have grabbed some focus. But Waltz was the only name anyone was hearing.

In that environment, the early-bird Broadcasters and SAG voters fell back on blogger buzz. Matt Damon's utterly unmerited nod (in a career that Sabin rightly points out has deserved many he hasn't received) was completely a result of bloggers looking for sight-unseen supporting nominees and putting down Damon as "familar name in prime Oscar bait" -- the same reason they're mostly putting down Russell Crowe in support this year – and the impressionable groups dutifully obeyed.

Stanley Tucci's nod was even more perverse. Tucci had given a gently moving performance in Julie and Julia that summer. Many looked ahead to The Lovely Bones and thought, hmm…this could be a big year for Tucci: let's earmark The Lovely Bones -- a more "significant" film -- as the spot for a Tucci nomination. A similar thought process had occurred in 1977 for Diane Keaton: she'd burst forth as a popular presence in Annie Hall in late Spring, and everyone knew she had the hot prospect Looking for Mr. Goodbar (like Bones, based on a major publishing success) coming up in the fall. Widespread feeling was that she'd get the nod for Goodbar. When the film turned out to be widely disliked, though, there was plenty of time for everyone to pull back and say, you know what, now that we think about it, let's vote for her for Annie Hall. Tucci might have benefitted from a similar re-thinking. But, the very week The Lovely Bones was reviewed (and declared largely a disaster), the Broadcast/SAG nods came out, and Tucci was there for Bones as blogger-decreed. That narrative set in motion, Oscar followed suit, and Tucci ended up with a wince-worthy nod in a year that should have made him more proud.

Anyway, the race is thus simple enough to discuss. Neither Damon nor Tucci gets the slightest thought. Christopher Plummer is respectable enough in The Last Station -- though a slumming lead -- but not close to a win. The only one of the non-Waltz four I'd have nominated is Woody Harrelson, who shows nice range and does his best to hold a diffuse narrative together.

But Waltz is just a knockout in Inglourious Basterds. My wife had not seen the film with me in the theatre, and had been progressively annoyed by Waltz's ostentatiously arch acceptance speeches at SAG and the Globes. Then she watched the film, at home, a few days before the Oscars. I walked in at about the half-hour mark -- after that long first scene at the farmhouse -- and my wife's first words were "He's PHENOMENAL". And this was of course long before his restaurant scene, his theatre lobby scene, or the memorable “That’s a bingo”. I tend to agree with my wife. Waltz may be a limited actor – he’s shown nothing very different in subsequent roles – but Landa is a beautifully written role that suits him to a tee, and he pretty much kills. I think he’s head and shoulders above anyone else on this paltry slate.
ksrymy
Adjunct
Posts: 1164
Joined: Fri Jul 01, 2011 1:10 am
Location: Wichita, KS
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by ksrymy »

Matt Damon did nothing worthy of a nomination although he's better at being South African than Leo DiCaprio was in 2006.

Stanley Tucci has always been a reliable character actor. His role in The Lovely Bones of course carried more Academy weight than his much better role in Julie & Julia.

These last three are deserving.

Magilla is right on the nose about Plummer. He was grand but the film's character study arc hurt it.

Woody Harrelson was a shock for me here like he was for you all in Larry Flynt (and Natural Born Killers if that's your sort of thing). This was the first non-Cheers role I remember him in and I was shocked by how great he was in such a different role.

But you'd be silly to not vote for Christoph Waltz. This is the second year in a row I predicted the Best Supporting Actor nominee after walking out of the theater opening night. Waltz is a tour de force and does everything with such ease. I think Hans Landa is Tarantino's best-written character and most well-versed. He effortlessly speaks five different languages and his mannerisms are spot-on. I'm looking forward to seeing him become a Tarantino regular.

My picks
____________________
1. Christoph Waltz - Inglourious Basterds
2. Christian McKay - Me and Orson Welles
3. Peter Capaldi - In the Loop
4. Woody Harrelson - The Messenger
5. Christopher Plummer - The Last Station

6. Daniel Brühl - Inglourious Basterds
"Men get to be a mixture of the charming mannerisms of the women they have known." - F. Scott Fitzgerald
Bruce_Lavigne
Graduate
Posts: 197
Joined: Tue Nov 16, 2004 1:47 pm
Location: Boston

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Bruce_Lavigne »

I guess I can sort of sympathize with those who are annoyed at how inevitable Waltz's victory eventually became, but for me, he completely blows away even my second choice for the award. He just makes that strong an impression in Inglourious Basterds that when I think about giving this award to anyone other than him, it seems thoroughly unsatisfying.

I have no issue with stars being nominated for supporting awards as long as the nominations in question are for supporting roles, and I liked Damon quite a bit in Invictus (and not much in The Informant!), but I'd be hard-pressed to say he deserved an Oscar; this is definitely a coattails nomination for a movie that probably didn't deserve to have coattails. Plummer is lead, and not terribly worthy of mention, especially in retrospect with Beginners on the horizon. I think Tucci is terrific in a not-so-terrific movie, though I must be in a pretty small minority, if enough people find his Lovely Bones performance so distasteful that they're talking about his barely-there Julie & Julia work as a viable alternative. As for Harrelson, he's excellent and nomination-worthy, but simply doesn't measure up to Waltz.

As for the also-rans, Christian McKay is my second choice; Peter Capaldi was a favorite of mine at the time, but I've cooled on his In the Loop performance somewhat now that I know he'd played that character on TV for years beforehand; and I was fine with Anthony Mackie and Alfred Molina, but didn't think either was a run-away "shouldabeen." Daniel Brühl, though... Not sure how I've been leaving him off my ballot for so long. Again, he's no Waltz, but he definitely belongs on my ballot.

My picks:
1. Christoph Waltz (Inglourious Basterds)
2. Christian McKay (Me and Orson Welles)
3. Daniel Brühl (Inglourious Basterds)
4. Woody Harrelson (The Messenger)
5. Peter Capaldi (In the Loop)
bizarre
Assistant
Posts: 566
Joined: Sat Sep 03, 2011 9:35 am

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by bizarre »

There was a pretty strong pool of contenders fighting for the final spot (which was ultimately taken by Damon - the safest choice there was and a mere case of year-long buzz materialising as a 'tick the boxes' choice despite poor reviews and middling support for the film itself). Closest to a nom were probably Christian McKay (Me and Orson Welles) and Alfred Molina (An Education). There was real speculation that Stanley Tucci would be nominated for Julie & Julia instead, and Peter Capaldi (In the Loop), Anthony Mackie (The Hurt Locker), Alec Baldwin (It's Complicated), Zach Galifianakis (The Hangover) and Paul Schneider (Bright Star) were also talked about.

Of the nominees I've only seen Waltz - who I find slightly overrated - so I won't vote.

My nominees:
1. Daniel Brühl ... Inglourious Basterds
2. Louis-do de Lencquesaing ... Father of My Children
3. Christoph Waltz ... Inglourious Basterds
4. Vlad Ivanov ... Police, Adjective
5. Olivier Gourmet ... Angel at Sea
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by The Original BJ »

Now we're getting to the point where I really feel like we just had this discussion yesterday, but...

I think several strong candidates were excluded for a handful of very weak contenders. When I saw An Education, I was all but certain it would make a Supporting Actor nominee out of Alfred Molina (who I actually just met a couple days ago -- SO NICE!) I don't really know what happened there. I know An Education didn't make a ton of money, but certainly more voters saw it than something like The Messenger! I'd also root for the uproariously profane Peter Capaldi in In the Loop, and Anthony Mackie, who strangely missed out on most of The Hurt Locker's awards party.

Matt Damon's nomination is utterly pointless. A big star in a lead role which barely required much acting in a mediocre movie in a year when he gave a genuinely inspired performance in another film. Total ballot-filler.

I guess it's at least nice that a memorable character actor like Stanley Tucci can call himself an Oscar nominee, but The Lovely Bones is a bad movie, and everything about his characterization is so obviously EVIL (that voice! that hair! that mustache!) it borders on self-parody.

Christopher Plummer gave a solid performance in The Last Station, and brings some wit and wisdom to the proceedings. But I found the movie a fairly bland effort, and didn't think Plummer triumphed in such a special way as to merit a prize. Plus, if Helen Mirren is a lead, there's no way to argue that Plummer is not also a lead.

I think it's a testament to the strength of Woody Harrelson's performance that he managed to become a near-certain Oscar nominee despite virtually no pre-release buzz and a movie that made, in Oscar terms, pennies and nickels at the box office. I think he's wonderful in The Messenger, as his character struggles to do a very draining job with professionalism and integrity. Harrelson movingly shows how hard it is for even this tough guy to detach himself emotionally from the people he must contact on a daily basis. Very powerful work, and a solid runner-up.

But my vote is with Christoph Waltz all the way, who just storms Inglourious Basterds with sadistic wit, ferocious intensity, and even, at movie's end, pathetic vulnerability. I can recall so many memorable moments from his performance -- the opening scene in the cabin, the whip cream bit, asking Diane Kruger to try on her shoe, negotiating for immunity with Pitt -- and even as I was watching the movie, I knew right away this character had the potential to become an iconic screen villain. I also love the story about how Tarantino almost came close to calling off the movie until Waltz auditioned, because he feared the film wouldn't work without the right actor in this role -- looking at the final product, it's hard to imagine Basterds without him. As far as I'm concerned, in this race, he's a bingo!
Sabin
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10747
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 12:52 am
Contact:

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Sabin »

Okri wrote
I was disappointed that Anthony Mackie kept getting overlooked everywhere for his taciturn performance in The Hurt Locker (especially since Renner was able to sneak through in a much more competitive category). But most of my favourites were from films that were way, way off AMPAS radar.
A nomination for Mackie would have been great, but I don't remember Best Actor being that competitive that year. Although Tobey Maguire was nominated for the Dramatic Globe for Brothers alongside Bridges, Clooney, Firth, and Freeman, I thought that Renner was a sure thing for a SAG nom and he was. I recall those five being pretty locked up early on with scattered talk of Matt Damon for The Informant and Daniel Day-Lewis for Nine ending the minute Downey Jr. won for Sherlock Holmes, and Viggo Mortensen weirdly never begun to figure into the race for The Road. I was pretty sold on the eventual five for Best Actor by the end of December.
"How's the despair?"
Okri
Tenured
Posts: 3345
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:28 pm
Location: Edmonton, AB

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Okri »

Null vote.

Haven't seen The Lovely Bones. Doubt I ever will.

Christopher Plummer is not a supporting actor in The Last Station. He's also not that good. But much like Hoffman in Doubt, he was gerrymandered into support because that was easier to get.

Matt Damon is not a supporting actor in Invictus. He's not bad. I have to admit that Tee's concerns about stars in support doesn't sway me much, but when he had another, much better performance available to nominate in lead (indeed, it's a stronger work than what his costar here delivered - and better than any of the other nominees), he gets in for this?

Woody Harrelson is quite solid in The Messenger. In a strong field, he makes a nice spot filler. In this field, I'd probably vote for him.

Then there is Christoph Waltz. He does good work. It's funny. It's scary. He's great in four languages. It's a solid victory, admittedly. I'm just rather irritated at how it steamrolled through the race. Not that there was THAT much in the way of competition. I was rather annoyed that Peter Capaldi didn't take more honors for In the Loop, but his Malcolm Tucker is a legendary comic creation on the small screen anyway and he translated it marvelously to the big screen (that raging energy). I was disappointed that Anthony Mackie kept getting overlooked everywhere for his taciturn performance in The Hurt Locker (especially since Renner was able to sneak through in a much more competitive category). But most of my favourites were from films that were way, way off AMPAS radar.
MovieFan
Graduate
Posts: 96
Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2011 5:40 am

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by MovieFan »

I dont think Waltz's performance is all that personally but I think its the strongest out of this group of nominees. I think Christian McKay gave the best supporting performance of the year
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19318
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Re: Best Supporting Actor 2009

Post by Big Magilla »

mlrg wrote:I guess this poll should be at the 82nd Oscars
Nope, it's where it's supposed to be - under "Oher 9th Decade Discussions".
Post Reply

Return to “81st and Other 9th Decade Discussions”