15 Actors Most Overdue for Oscar

1. Ralph Fiennes — Longtime cinephile's favorite online publication The Film Experience often refers to him as the best actor of his generation not to win. In addition to his two nominations in the 90s, he also was a great lead in another Best Picture nominee in Quiz Show. In the 00s, he garnered buzz in Constant Gardener, and the trifecta of Reader/In Bruges/Duchess (which might have split votes) in 2008, in addition to infusing one of the decade’s big franchises with Voldemort. He also got in on the Hannibal action in Red Dragon. In the 2010s, his output lessened. He likely was the most inventive Wes Anderson protagonist ever put to film in Grand Budapest Hotel (sorry Jason Schwartzman in Rushmore) and was quietly brilliant in The Dig a bit more recently.

2. Bradley Cooper -- While finishing a distant third in this past year's Oscar race, Cooper is well-known to have education bona fides (he went to an elite school) and to be a serious actor with a capital S. His streak of 3 straight nominations from 2012-2014 shows and 5 total shows that he's managed to break through at the top of wish lists by now. He’s getting so immersive (and possibly desperate) that he might pull a more extreme stunt like Revenant and get himself eaten by a bear.

3.  Paul Giamatti — I think the voters and media got a taste of how good the possibility of “And the Oscar Goes to Paul Giamatti” would have sounded. That he does not like a conventional leading man has worked in his favor as he is very much an ordinary man in the same way that Dustin Hoffman and Ernest Borgnine captured our imaginations.

4. Harvey Keitel — With luminaries like James Caan, Ned Beatty, and Danny Aiello tragically gone, he might be the last of the greatest generation of character actors who changed acting in the 1970s. Like Bill Nighy or Bruce Dern with recent norms, it might never be too late

5. Daniel Craig — Sean Connery won an Oscar for James Bond, but Craig had a far wider range and showed before and after Bond that he was willing to take risky roles, like Truman Capote’s lover in Infamous or a detective whose idiosyncrasies seemingly are modeled after Foghorn Leghorn. There are a ton of great roles in between in Craig’s filmography and his turns as Bond and LeBlanc make him a more marketable figure than, say, Colin Firth.

6. Johnny Depp — I’m not sure I’d cast him on a film because his drunken and difficult on-set behavior has become quite legendary (exacerbated through accounts at the Amber Heard trial), but to the degree that he would get cast, he’s never less than brilliant and superbly inventive. That can’t be denied.

7. Hugh Jackman — A convincing musical lead is hard to deny like his work in Les Miserables or Greatest Showman (a fan favorite, didn’t go so well with critics on the left). With his popularity with the Wolverine roles, and his range of work like The Front Runner or The Fountain, it’s not far-fetched at all that in a given year, he might have the best performance of the year. If it’s close, I have faith that the extremely amicable Jackman could get the award by doing well on the awards circuit

8. Benedict Cumberbatch — I tend to think best actors should be a little on the older side, and after Casey Affleck and Rami Malek, I’m happiest with actors winning the lead award over, say, 40, which is why Adam Driver seems a bit young for me (he’s 39, and nowhere near due). Cumberbatch might be there at 48. Damn, how the time has flown. He’s been superb in movies dating quite a while, and even if he doesn’t have a gazillion nominations, he does have an Emmy, and he’s the kind of guy you know could nail any future challenging role. He has been in 5 Best Picture nominees (War Horse, Imitation Game, 12 Years a Slave, Atonement, 1917), so his filmography is solid, even if his roles in a couple of his pictures were small.

9. Ed Norton — An actor’s actor, Norton has had some great break-out roles in the 90s, and has acted in a wide range (he even directed a romantic comedy). Motherless Brooklyn (his second directorial film) and his role in the Glass Onion show he’s still pretty ambitious.

10. Liam Neeson — His batting average of noticeable performance to regular performance is low considering how prolific he is, but he’s pretty beloved, and he has an excuse for acting in so many movies (it helps him get over his wife’s death). The probability that he has another brilliant performance like Kinsey or Schindler’s List shouldn’t be that far out of reach.

11. Eddie Murphy — The degree to which he held up SNL and the film industry in the 1980s can’t be underestimated. If you want to give a comic star an award, Murphy would be a good choice. The problem is that there isn’t that often a role like Dolemite is My Name or Dreamgirls.

12. Michael Fassbender — In 2011, he broke out with simultaneous plaudits for Shame, Dangerous Method, X-Men, and Jane Eyre all at once. He got two nominations in the next four years and I think he’s still growing strong. He’d be on the newer end of nominees.

13. Jon Hamm — The leading man on Mad Men fits the mold of a leading man very easily and I’m often thinking he’d be a good lead whenever I armchair cast a film idea I think of in my head.

14. Steve Martin — Hard to think of a more beloved legend in comedy. Roles like 2005’s Shopgirl show he can do something big if he gets the right role. He’s retiring soon, so he can market such a win as his swan song.

15. Richard Gere — This 75-year-old actor has had roles in key films in the 1970s (Days of Heaven), 1980s (Officer and a Gentleman), 1990s (Pretty Woman, Primal Fear), 2000s (Unfaithful, Chicago, Amelia), and 2010s (Arbitrage). He’s never been the preeminent of his generation and he’s never had the hot streak of a lot of great movies in a row, but his filmography stretches back a ways. With a good role, I don’t see why he wouldn’t be cheered as a consummate screen icon.

Film reviews of 2007 based on the trailers

I haven't actually watched a single film in 2007 other than My Brother which I screened at a film festival. I usually don't watch much at the beginning of the year and use this time to catch up on films from the previous year, or maybe pursue other hobbies. I did this in December too before holiday season and so here are some reviews that I just guessed at what they'd be like using everything i know about movies. This is really a fun exercise. Anyway, many of these films have already come out, so please tell me how my blind guess compares with your experiences

TMNT-This strikes me as the exact opposite of what they might teach you in a film marketing class. The Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles were popular when I was growing up in the early 90s and, well, me along with my age group aren’t necessarily a good audience for this movie, because we’ve kind of grown up. I’m not up-to-date with what cartoons are being played on Saturday mornings I don’t really know if anyone currently under the age of 14 even knows what the Ninja Turtles are, and the rest of us can’t explain it to them because we’ve sort of forgotten. .

Zodiac-I’m pretty sure that David Fincher (the director of this film as well as Fight Club and Se7en) is a jerk. His film “Curious Case of Benjamin Buttons” was filming throughout New Orleans when I was there and once I was near the shooting and everyone on his crew I talked to said he was, so he must really be bad. If one or two people think you’re a jerk, ok, but everyone seemed to just be in agreement about this. Anyway, as for Zodiac, it might win its opening weekend, but it’ll be forgotten within a year. Probably just a good thrill ride, nothing more, as some people are making it out to be.

Shooter-Mark Wahlberg, your last 2 movie choices were awesome so I’ll let this one slide, but this does not look like anything remotely original. It looks like a Bourne Identity copy-off, so please don’t talk about how much you love this movie when you’ll be having to eat your words when the bad reviews come in this week. And by the way, I don’t know why people responded so well the Bourne Identity or rather, could the people who responded well to it please admit that it was all about the cool car-chasing and fighting scenes and it had nothing to do with the plot or character development (because it had none)?

300-Sin City taught us (or at least me) that all the cool special effects in the world does not redeem a violent movie if it has no soul to it. Sin City wasn’t about real people. The people in that movie (except possibly Bruce Willis) drank nothing but alcohol, did nothing for recreation other than secure hookers and brutally kill each other, and had no moral qualms about anything. In other words, they weren’t real, just the embodiments of perverted adolescent fantasy. For that, I have a hunch that Frank Miller isn’t so much interested in the history of Greek warfare as he just wants to show a bunch of blood, gore, and other guy stuff. Consdering, he did actually seem moderately knowledgable about the historic period in an interview, I might be wrong though and I’d be eager to be proven so.

Blades of Glory-I’d have to say that this might be the make-or-break-it film for John Heder’s reputation. He will now be 3 films removed from Napoleon Dynamite. Benchwarmers did well at the box office but wasn’t amazingly well-received. School for Scoundrels did not do well at the box office despite aggressive marketing (although while I haven’t seen it, it looked like a good vehicle to me), so considering the hype for this film, it might be his last chance to win audiences over as John Heder or stay trapped in Napoleon Dynamite forever. I’m more anxious to see how SNLer Amy Poehler and Will Arnett do in this movie.


Wild Hogs-It’s a buddy comedy/road trip kind of movie, but what’s odd about it is its group of “buddies” are the four most random people in Hollywood. John Trovolta is a cult icon known for his singing and dancing, a few choicy roles and his scientology; William H. Macy is one of those character actors who nr, Martin Lawrence is a hack comedian, and Tim Allen have probably never been in the same room with each at the same time. They’ve probably never been within a 5-mile radius of each other

Meet the Robinsons-I couldn’t even stay awake through the trailer. It’s a cartoon

Breaking the Gates-If they really thought that a film about the Rwandan genocide would be a film of artistic merit, they would not have released it in the first three months of the year. They would have released it somewhere near the end for Oscar consideration. Thus we are left to conclude that it’s probably some generic action flick.

Astronaut Farmer-I have to wonder what Billy Bob Thornton is doing here. It’s one of those triumphant value-of-the-human-spirit movies and he seems like the least likely guy to be on screen when the orchestra swells up and plays that sappy music that it plays in these kinds of movies. His screen persona is that of a cynical and jaded personality. Let’s review what he’s been in: Intolerable Cruelty (a black comedy about the fickleness of marriage), Man Who Wasn’t There (a film noir), Bad Santa (another black comedy), Primary Colors (his character was one of the more shady members of President Clinton’s staff), A Simple Plan and Bandits. But I don’t know, I like space movies, so I might give him the benefit of the doubt.

Smoking Aces-This would be one of the few from the last couple of months that I’d have a mild interest in seeing and I can’t explain it because I don’t know much about it. I’m just attracted to it by the name. The title sounds cool: something with playing cards and guns. Or maybe they’re shooting at cards with guns? I don’t know. It’s probably some hip and shiek nourish thriller-type thing. The other thing I know about it is that I saw Jeremy Piven on Regis and Kelly and he said something like “this is the best movie I’ve ever been in.” On the one hand, he has been in Black Hawk Down, Runaway Jury and a bit part in the Rob Altman movie The Player whose cast included practically everyone in Hollywood. He’s also been in some of the worst movies of the last 2 decades: Rush Hour 2, Chasing Liberty, Very Bad Things and Singles.

Freedom Writers-Coach Carter, Glory Road and now this. Does anyone else see this pattern of January as Dead Poets’ Society rip-off month where they do the overused plot of actor stretches his range by being an inspirational teacher/coach who turns things around for a group of dummies/retarded people/repressed/at-risk youth, etc. I’m not saying that this wouldn’t be a good movie, but I am saying that if you’ve seen any of the above mentioned movies along with The Emperor’s Club, Mona Lisa Smile, Take the Lead, Stand and Deliver, Hoosiers, or We Are Marshall, I’m betting you’ve probably seen this movie too. Still, within the list above, I might cite a couple (Glory Road, Mona Lisa Smile) as slight variations, and if it’s based on a true story (unlike Emperor’s Club or Mona Lisa Smile) then it’s a story slightly more worth telling

Stardust-Is this a fantasy film or a period piece? What are Robert De Niro and Michelle Pfeiffer doing here? Is Robert De Niro just giving up on acting and trying to commit career suicide? He’s arguably the best actor of his generation so he shouldn’t take parts like this.

Georgia Rule-The standards for Lindsay Lohan are going to be high because the stories of her being late to set and upsetting the producer is going to more publicity than this movie is going to get. I actually think that this will be good and do decently. I won’t see it, but if you like this kind of film, I’d blindly recommend it.

Reign Over Me-I’m just flabbergasted. I have no idea what to think. Adam Sandler and Don Cheadle are such a random pair of variables that I can’t even begin to predict where this movie will go.

Blind Dating-So it looks like American Pie with blind people. That doesn’t sound funny, it sounds insensitive and mean-spirited. Oh, god forbid, you’re 22 and a virgin. Wasn’t the standard for it being an embarrassment that you’re a virgin 40 just last year? Oh, Jane Seymour is in this again, haha.

The Hawk is Dying-I love the music in the background, but, um, what the hell is this about, again? Let’s recap and I am not making this up: First, we see that this movie was an entry in Sundance Film Festival. Not that it won anything, it was just an entry. So basically the art house crowd let the movie be screened for them. Paul Giamatti spots a hawk through some binoculars and starts panicking. The hawk isn’t even attack him, he’s just sitting there in a field. If birdwatching is that stressful of an activity for him, maybe he should take up croquetting. Words appear on screen such as: “between passion and obsession” “sanity and madness” and these moments “define our lives.” There’s some talk about how he has to train a hawk or something. Some guy in voiceover says that “it’s possible for a man to live his whole life and not know whether he’s a coward or not.” Um, he’s just birdwatching and carrying a hawk on his arm, this isn’t really that big of a deal. Then some guy says “put down the bird” or something, like it’s a gun. Again, everyone here is just overreacting a lot. Oh yeah, and Paul Giamatti kisses someone towards the end of the trailer. How nice. Oh yeah, and Samuel L. Jackson is in it, dispensing advice to Paul Giamatti about his birdwatching obsession, or something. It’s confusing.. I need an aspirin,

Oscar Blog I: Best supporting actor

OK, I sadly did not get to writing around my predictions last night before the actual ceremony, but I was frantically trying to research and write (and it did require research to back up those opinions) my edgy article below that I was trying to submit to oscarwatch to no avail. I have seen the light of blog publicity and it's name is Oscarwatch, so it's very advantageous to my to appear on that site.

I did actually make a carefully well-thought out set of predictions that I sent to Oscarwatch Central for their critical compilation, but I didn't actually write those predictions down. Oscarwatch Central Predictions are currently trying to retrieve the file that I sent them because #1 I can't remember myself, exactly what I predicted and #2 They were some kick-ass predictions and who knows, I might have won. I predicted William Moynahan*, Departed for editing, and I predicted Alan Arkin for Supporting Actor. The reason that I am writing this oscar blog now (and I do consider this a blog because I'm filtering and recopying my notes from last night) was that I spent last night at a local movie theater (Arlington Cinema and Drafthouse) which had a fun program put up by two film critics. It was a good time and I won a ton of free DVDs for knowing a couple trivia questions**

Even though I picked him myself, I thought Arkin had no chance in Hell of winning and I was thrilled that he did so. Out of boredom at the lock status and the repitition of awards for the same director and actors, it was just an effort to mix it up a little. I personally just wanted to vote for anyone other than Eddie Murphy and felt that Arkin had the best chance. Personally, I thought that Djimon Hotsou and Mark Wahlberg* were the strongest (even though Wahlberg had little screentime) and I confess to not having seen Dreamgirls so I couldn't even tell you if Alan Arkin was REALLY better than Eddie Murphy. The truth was that Alan Arkin was very good but in all honesty, he didn't stick out in Little Miss Sunshine, but that's really a tribute to the strength of the SAG-winning ensemble, and I'm not sure if being the best member in your cast is neccessarily a requirement to being the only actor from your movie to win the oscar.

What really was motivating me was I was just hoping it would be anyone but Eddie Murphy because he really is not fit to be an oscar-winner. The prestigeous label of Oscar-winner gets tarnished if that oscar winner goes on to make bad movies. Everytime, you see "Oscar-winner F. Murray Abraham" on the back of a film like "Muppets in Space" at the video store or Oscar-winner Louise Fletcher in "High School High" or Oscar-winner Cuba Gooding Jr. in "Rat Race" and "Snow Dogs," it brings the reputation of the academy down that much more. I'm not saying it's not tarnished already, but Eddie Murphy didn't even have the decency to wait before he actually won his oscar to tarnish it by becoming the next Cuba Gooding Jr., wich Norbit. And you know what? Maybe it wasn't a coincidence that Cuba Gooding Jr. was actually in the movie itself. Maybe Murphy was making a bold statement defending the right of oscar winners like Cuba to go on making bad movies. Well, no thanks said the academy, and I fully second that notion. It works just like that in anything else. The NBA probably regretted voting Ron Artest as an all-Star after he went into the stands and started beating up players. Baseball wouldn't let Pete Rose into the hall of fame because he has a disease. And Eddie Murphy has a disease too: he can't stop making bad movies, and he needs to go into a therapy group with Adam Sandler, Pauly Shore and Martin Lawrence. A vote for Alan Arkin was a vote for consistency, who has consistently made good movies. It was a resounding statement that just because you did some great things in your day like singlehandedly resurrect Saturday Night Live, does not mean we will crown you with a title bestowing you as a "great actor" when your latest movie work ranges from mediocre to abysmal.


Now, I have a couple grad school classes to attend, but rest assured, i will continue oscar blogging while people are still google searching for oscar blogs so I can rack up some hits.

*This is the most nitpicky thing you'll ever hear in your life, but why does Scrosesee call him Bill, I'm pretty sure most everyone else calls him William or Will. I know Bill is short for William Moynahan, but if Will Moynahan wanted to go by Bill, he might have submitted his name as such. I am curious to know how many people other than Scorsesee call him Bill. Scorsesee also refers to Robert De Niro as Bobby and I don't think anyone else does that either. Who does Scorsesee think he is?

** Question I didn't know the answer was the last child actor or actress to win. Thanks to the lucky coincidence of having read eddieonfilm.blogspot.com's oscar predictions, I won a DVD of the Prestige, screening passes to 300 and a CD for the soundtrack of Flushed Away for knowing "What was the Artistic Oscar given alongside Wings?" I vaguely remembered the answer was a film called Sunrise.
I also won a DVD of the Guardian for knowing that Bob Fossee beat Ford Copolla for best director the first time he was up for a Godfather film, and not wanting to hog all the gifts I helped someone else in the audience name on of the three actors who Martin Scorsesee has lost to (my initial answer was Clint Eastwood, Robert Redford and Roman Polanski who had a history as a child actor, but they didn't take that as an answer. They were looking for Kevin Costner)

Some other notes on the best supporting actor race:
-I'm not sure whether Mark Wahlberg had a good or bad night. For one thing, he lost and Ellen bothered him right after losing en route to handing Martin Scorsesee her script. I think Ellen was just being friendly but maybe she could've picked a better time. Also Scorsesee was like "I want to thank Jack who's such an honor to work with and gives so much" and "Leo, let's work another 12 or 15 years" and then he was like "and Mark" and that was it. Mark Wahlberg stole the show from Jack Nicholson, Leo, Matt Damon and everyone else, in every scene he was in. Without Wahlberg, the movie's tension wouldn't have been leveled with comic relief, and he handled the dialogue so well. Wahlberg's clip was also pretty short which pissed me off as well. On the bright side, when Jack Black and Will Ferrell beat up the oscar nominees after the movie, they said they'd spare him, so that's good news

-Djimon Hotsou and Eddie Murphy both looked really anxious waiting for the name to be announced. Hotsou looked like he was about to get a flu shot and was waiting for the needle to go in his arm.