Best Supporting Actor 1979

[MovieFan]

Melvyn Douglas in Being There gets my vote. He creates a real heartfelt portrail, and he has terrific chemistry with Sellers. Im actually suprised he is winning here because most people seem to cry Duvall was robbed, which I never believed as great as Duvall was

[mayukh]

And Justin Henry in Kramer vs Kramer is, for once, a real child - believable, human, natural, extremely well directed certainly (Benton showed a Truffaut touch here). Any performance, in films especially, is the result of the combined work of actor and director, and this beautiful, affecting but unaffected performance definitely had to be nominated.

This is why I voted for Justin Henry.

[The Original BJ]

I completely agree that Paul Dooley's omission is outrageous -- he's very funny and hugely touching in Breaking Away and clearly merited inclusion over some of the weaker candidates.

My opinion on The Black Stallion is in line with Mister Tee's. I think it's a special movie, and hugely impressive visually -- (a pox on the cinematographers branch!) But the acting isn't very distinguished. Mickey Rooney doesn't have anything interesting to do, and he's never been much of a favorite anyway.

I don't really like The Rose at all. I think Bette Midler's energy is exciting, but I think the film overall is histrionic and doesn't really know how to channel her talent into anything coherent. Frederic Forrest was solid as an average guy attempting to connect with a big star, but I feel he mostly fades into the background when placed alongside Midler's flashier role.

Justin Henry is really very sweet in Kramer vs. Kramer, and you'd be hard-pressed to argue that the tenderness of his relationship with Dustin Hoffman wasn't the main reason his film struck such a chord with audiences. Unlike many child performances, his work feels natural throughout, and doesn't feel obviously "directed." But for me it's not nearly at the level of, say, Anna Paquin or Patty Duke in their Oscar-winning roles -- in those cases, I was certain I was watching genuine acting talent, no matter the age of the performer. I'd say those two fall on the "excellent" side of Sabin's scale, whereas I'd put Henry firmly in the "effective."

So I come down to Douglas or Duvall, and it's not an easy choice between the two. Douglas has the larger role, and is pitch-perfect throughout -- in order for this movie to work, this character has to appear completely rational, so that the audience understands how a well-educated, well-spoken person such as Benjamin Rand would place such faith in Chauncey. But Douglas does so, with gravity and wit, and he's a quiet joy to watch. If Douglas weren't so committed to making his character a well-rounded human being, I wonder if Being There wouldn't feel more like a one-joke script.

And then there's Duvall, in the smaller but more iconic role, as the psychotic Colonel Kilgore. Yes, the actor only appears in the one segment, but he completely dominates it, his swaggering physicality a disturbing embodiment of American military might. "I love the smell of napalm in the morning" is, of course, beyond legend, but my favorite line reading in that scene might be "Some day this war's gonna end," spoken with an unsettling bit of regret from a man who can't seem to tell the difference between a military attack and a surfing escapade. Thanks to Duvall, Kilgore is a striking, vivid creation.

I don't have a strong preference between these two actors, and I don't think their performances this year were necessarily a career peak for either. I went into this post leaning Duvall, and since the consensus seems to have come down largely on the side of Douglas, I'll spread the wealth a bit and cast a vote Duvall's way this time.

[ITALIANO]

Mickey Rooney didn't have the most complex character to play in The Black Stallion, but he was a beloved figure in American cinema, so we'll take his nomination as a kind of friendly tribute, and a not undeserved one.

If an actor from Apocalypse Now had to be nominated - and one had to - then it could only be Robert Duvall, especially considering that Marlon Brando's much-talked about presence had generally being considered disappointing by the critics. Duvall played a showy character, was a respected actor, was in an admired movie... He couldn't fail to be nominated, and even winning wasn't impossible. But it's good that he didn't win - he had been and would be even better.

For some reason, American cinema doesn't seem to "get" childhood. American novels do, and they have given us memorable child characters - but in American movies children seem to be, let's face it, little monsters, adults dressed up as kids, you know, the Haley Joel Osment/Dakota Fanning type. Americans mistake their performances for "great acting", they can't seem to see how grotesque they are, so more than once I wondered if American children are really like that - cute, precocious, wise-cracking, and downright annoying. Thank God, there are exceptions - the recent The Tree of Life, for example, shows an insight into the world of children which is worthy of the great American literature. And Justin Henry in Kramer vs Kramer is, for once, a real child - believable, human, natural, extremely well directed certainly (Benton showed a Truffaut touch here). Any performance, in films especially, is the result of the combined work of actor and director, and this beautiful, affecting but unaffected performance definitely had to be nominated.

There are good reasons why Melvyn Douglas won - including maybe (though I'm not sure about this) the fact that his political views, by 1979, had turned out to be the correct ones. If I hadn't already picked him, I'd probably do it now...

... but I'm free to vote for Frederic Forrest here. It's a game after all, isn't it? And I actually think he was an extremely interesting new actor in The Rose. I know, the movie is a bit messy, but the interaction between Forrest and Bette Midler has an improvised quality, a lively, unplanned, almost sadomasochistic side that I've always found intriguingly close to truth (well, maybe not "always" - when I first saw the movie on tv I was certainly too young to know). It's a painful but realistic portrayal of a difficult relationship, very typical of the decade the movie was made in, and Forrest shows an unusual edge; too bad he more or less vanished from sight after this.

[Mister Tee]

Magilla, you might want to re-read Inside Oscar. It was indeed at the Globes where Justin Henry cried; by Oscar night, he managed a simple "Not again" roll of his eyes.

As Magilla says, nominations weren't nearly as locked in then as they often are today. But I was always leery of Paul Dooley's chances, despite the fact that everyone I knew thought he was terrific, he'd won NBR, and Breaking Away was a sure best picture nominee. He just didn't have the critical heat some others (Douglas, Duvall, Forrest) did. And I always thought Henry was likely to be carried along by Kramer's early-on clear best picture juggernaut. Dooley was borderline, and sadly lost out to Rooney.

I was actually surprised Douglas went on to win that year. The fact that he already had an Oscar, and that Being There was so under-regarded by voters overall (how it missed a screenplay nod over A Little Romance and La Cage is incomprehensible) pushed me to predicting Duvall in the pool that year. Apparently long-term affection -- and possibly his secondary credit for Seduction of Joe Tynan -- was enough to pull him over the line.

[Greg]

Well, winning or losing a Golden Globe is no big deal compared to winning or losing an Oscar.

[Big Magilla]

Haven't seen The Rose or The Black Stallion so I can't vote. I wouldn't have a problem with Duvall or Douglas winning. Also, was Justin Henry widely predicted for a nomination? There's a difference between excellent and effective, especially with child performers. I would cite Haley Joel Osment's work in The Sixth Sense and A.I. Artificial Intelligence as excellent. I remember Henry simply being quite effective in this role. And I see that he lost the Golden Globe for New Star of the Year - Male (what a stupid category!) to Ricky Schroeder for The Champ even though he was also nominated for Best Supporting Actor alongside Robert Duvall and Melvyn Douglas (who both tied), Frederic Forest, and Laurence Olivier for A Little Romance, which I have not seen but find the score to be beautiful and can only assume the film is some kind of insufferable. I've never understood how Breaking Away could score nominated for Best Picture, Director, Original Screenplay, and especially Best Supporting Actress (Barbara Barrie) without Dooley picking up a nomination. Were the predicted nominees Dooley, Douglas, Duvall, Forrest, and Henry?

There weren't any "predicted" nominees back then in teh sense that there are now, especially in the blogasphere, however Douglas, Duvall and Forrest were certainly expected. Rooney and Henry were surprises to me.

I always found Dustin Hoffman's remark that Justin Hnery cried when he lost to Melvyn Douglas a head-scratcher. If the kid was going to cry when he lost, wouldn't he have done it at the Globes when he lost to both Douglas and Duvall in the Supporting Actor category and Schroeder in the New Star category? By the time he got to the Oscars he should have been used to losing.

[Reza]

Voted for Douglas.

My picks for 1979:

1. Paul Dooley, Breaking Away
2. Denholm Elliott, Saint Jack
3. Melvyn Douglas, Being There
4. Robert Duvall, Apocalypse, Now
5. Frederic Forrest, The Rose

The 6th Spot: Christopher Plummer, The Silent Partner

[Precious Doll]

My choices:

1. Terry Jones for Life of Brian
2. Denholm Elliott for Saint Jack
3. Pat Hingle for When You Comin' Back Red Ryder? (Like Frederic Forrest Hingle had a great year with this and Norma Rae)
4. Melvyn Douglas for Being There
5. John Huston for Winter Kills

[Sabin]

Haven't seen The Rose or The Black Stallion so I can't vote. I wouldn't have a problem with Duvall or Douglas winning. Also, was Justin Henry widely predicted for a nomination? There's a difference between excellent and effective, especially with child performers. I would cite Haley Joel Osment's work in The Sixth Sense and A.I. Artificial Intelligence as excellent. I remember Henry simply being quite effective in this role. And I see that he lost the Golden Globe for New Star of the Year - Male (what a stupid category!) to Ricky Schroeder for The Champ even though he was also nominated for Best Supporting Actor alongside Robert Duvall and Melvyn Douglas (who both tied), Frederic Forest, and Laurence Olivier for A Little Romance, which I have not seen but find the score to be beautiful and can only assume the film is some kind of insufferable. I've never understood how Breaking Away could score nominated for Best Picture, Director, Original Screenplay, and especially Best Supporting Actress (Barbara Barrie) without Dooley picking up a nomination. Were the predicted nominees Dooley, Douglas, Duvall, Forrest, and Henry?

[Big Magilla]

Melvyn Douglas' superb performance in Being Theredid indeed merit a second Oscar while Frederic Forest and Robert Duvall mertied nominations. My other two slots were filled by Paul Dolley (Breaking Away) and James Woods (The Onion Field).

[Mister Tee]

In bountiful years -- which 1979 was -- there are often greater Oscar disappointments, as the field is broad enough for personal favorites to be boxed out. When the '79 nominations were released (in the newspaper -- it was the pre-TV announcements era), I had two crushing letdowns: Manhattan being omitted for film/director, and Paul Dooley's wonderful comic supporting performance in Breaking Away also failing to make the cut. I thought he was easily the year's best; I regret his absence to this day.

On something of a lesser level, I'd cite Mac Davis' shifty quarterback in North Dallas Forty, and James Mason's fussy Dr. Watson in the more-or-less forgotten Murder by Decree, as nomination-worthy.

To the actual contenders:

The Black Stallion was a largely impressive movie -- visually, a knockout -- but I didn't think the acting was all that distinguished. Mickey Rooney's nomination has to be chalked up to auld lang syne.

I'm not, in general, much for kids' performances competing, but Justin Henry was certainly a major factor in making Kramer vs. Kramer a success, and he's believable throughout. But, of course, with a kid you're never sure how much credit goes to him and how much to the director.

Frederic Forrest did have an impressive year -- one he was never really able to follow up. He's very solid in The Rose, matching Bette beat-for-beat. If I liked the movie more, I might be inclined to go his way.

Robert Duvall has the clip we'll never be allowed to forget, but his role is actually not all that dominant in Apocalypse Now. There are better chances to vote for him, in lead, and in fact I/we have already done so.

So let's agree with the Academy and salute Melvyn Douglas. I was one of the dissenters on Douglas' '63 prize, but here I'm fully enthusiastic: he's very funny and very moving in a role that tured out to be something of a valedictory. If all sentimental wins were of this variety, there'd be alot fewer complaints from this corner. Douglas for the easy win.

[ksrymy]

This is a fairly solid lineup with the only poor nominees being sentimental ones.

That being said, Douglas, Duvall, and Forrest are the year's three greatest nominees and some of the most solid of the '70s at that.

Frederic Forrest had the best year also giving a worthy performance in Apocalypse Now as Chef. But as the long-suffering chauffeur to Bette Midler he was nominated for the proper film.

But this is easily between Douglas and Duvall, but there really is no competition. Duvall is stellar and delivers some of the screen's most famous lines... but other than that I can't think of anything Oscar-worthy about it. This is easily Melvyn Douglas' Oscar. I went into Being There excited about Peter Sellers (whom I find terribly overrated in this film) but came away shocked and blown away by what Douglas did. It can't be a sentimental swan song win because Douglas already had one win under his belt (and deservedly-so) for Hud. Douglas is more than effective in his role and inhabits it with truth and self-reflection as Douglas died two years later. The level of honesty and sheer realism in his performance is more than enough to win my personal award, but the Academy got it right here. A deserved win in this category, the best of the '70s, and one of the best to win ever.

My picks
__________________
1) Melvyn Douglas - Being There
2) Robert Duvall - Apocalypse Now
3) Frederic Forrest - The Rose/Apocalypse Now
4) Paul Dooley - Breaking Away
5) Dennis Hopper - Apocalypse Now

6) Terry Jones - Life of Brian