“The Tim Robbins Syndrome”

Home // Forums // Movies // “The Tim Robbins Syndrome”

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 52 total)
Created
4 years ago
Last Reply
4 years ago
51
replies
2267
views
27
users
6
5
4
  • Beau S.
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104354

    I’m coining a new Oscar term: “The Tim Robbins Syndrome.”

    The term is used to refer to an Oscar win that everybody seems to dislike, yet there doesn’t seem to be a better alternative.

    The year of Robbins’ win was quite a weak year for supporting actor. There was little passion behind any of the films in the category except Mystic River and it was unlikely that the Academy watched any of them besides that one (and maybe 21 Grams). Very few of the performances stand out as well. Watanabe is memorable in his film, but few would consider that kind of performance Oscar worthy.

    So, although he didn’t give an Oscar-worthy performance, Robbins deserves his Oscar because there is no alternative?

    Would you agree with this statement? Can you think of other scenarios this applies to? 

    Reply
    LostBoy2003
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 18th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104356

    I don’t hate Tim Robbins win but I agree with your theory.

    If I am remembering correctly there was a lot of support early on for Sean Astin that didn’t seem to carry through. I’m not sure why since it would of made a great story (son of an oscar winner) 

    I think Alec Baldwin would have gotten my vote.     

    ReplyCopy URL
    Halo_Insider
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 3rd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104357

    I think that he was deserving for his category, but it would have pleased me greatly to see Peter Sarsgaard earn some recognition for Shattered Glass. I’m also a fan of Sean Astin’s work in The Return of theKing, as he really seemed to become the heart of the trilogy. A little surprised that Albert Finney never caught traction for Big Fish.

    John Mills might be one of the kings of this potential trope. Whenever I see websites compile lists for “Worst Supporting Actors of All time”, I feel like his is one of the chief wins that gets cited, yet I rarely hear people speak passionately about any of the other nominated performances. I guess Chief Dan George was the frontrunner for his work in Little Big Man, and there was Gene Hackman for I Never Sang for My Father, but I can never seem to gather a consensus on who really deserved the trophy that year (really, I think more people would be likely to say that Hackman should have won a Supporting Oscar for Bonnie and Clyde). Karl Malden for Patton, maybe? It might be less of a problem of no performance being worthy and more of one where none are worthy enough to truly shine as something that was snubbed.
     

    ReplyCopy URL
    Logan
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104358

    I remember Finney being in the conversation but, after him missing out on some key awards, Robbins being the easy favorite.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Macbeth
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 7th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104359

    I really think Eugene Levy should have gotten some attention for A Mighty Wind

    ReplyCopy URL
    allabout oscars
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 20th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104360

    I’m coining a new Oscar term: “The Tim Robbins Syndrome.”

    The term is used to refer to an Oscar win that everybody seems to dislike, yet there doesn’t seem to be a better alternative.

    The year of Robbins’ win was quite a weak year for supporting actor. There was little passion behind any of the films in the category except Mystic River and it was unlikely that the Academy watched any of them besides that one (and maybe 21 Grams). Very few of the performances stand out as well. Watanabe is memorable in his film, but few would consider that kind of performance Oscar worthy.

    So, although he didn’t give an Oscar-worthy performance, Robbins deserves his Oscar because there is no alternative?

    Would you agree with this statement? Can you think of other scenarios this applies to? 

    Its your opinion that Robbins did not deserve his oscar win.
    IMO..his is one of the best of all time..so can we have a syndrome for 50 other actors who have won??

    ReplyCopy URL
    Baby Clyde
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 8th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104361

    Tim Robbins is bloody awful in Mystic River.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Atypical
    Participant
    Joined:
    Dec 1st, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104362

    I thought that Tim Robbins was a very deserving winner for “Mystic River,” so I don’t agree with any part of this premise. There were many other examples of this “syndrome” that could have been more apt than this one.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Logan
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 11th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104363

    I remember being in a class and, in order to write a summary about what I had decided to read, I’d have to cut out a newspaper story and deliver both pieces of writing to my teacher. One of my favorite things to do was go to the movie section and look at all of the posters and read the reviews/notices on them. I distinctly remember seeing a Mystic River advertisement with a statement by some critic that read something like, “Penn and Robbins are sure Best Actor contenders.”

    Having seen Mystic River somewhat recently, I agree that the story was as much about Robbins as it was about Penn.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Macbeth
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 7th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104364

    The line-up should have looked like this (in order)

    1. Tim Robbins as Dave Boyle in Mystic River
    2. Eugene Levy as Mitch Cohen in A Mighty Wind
    3. Ken Watanabe as Lord Moritsugu Katsumoto in The Last Samurai
    4. Bill Nighy as Billy Mack in Love Actually
    5. Albert Finney as Edward Bloom in Big Fish

    Christopher Guest has had many award-worthy performances in his films – Catherine O’Hara in For Your Consideration, Fred Willard in Best in Show, Himself in Waiting for Guffman – but none of them were worthy of an Academy Award nomination like Eugene Levy was in A Mighty Wind. It is a hilarious, but sweet performance.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Miss Frost
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104365

    Tim Robbins is bloody awful in Mystic River.

    Couldn’t agree more. His performance is a complete and utter trainwreck.

    ReplyCopy URL
    M H
    Participant
    Joined:
    Nov 7th, 2010
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104366

    I remember basically nothing about Robbins in Mystic River, so I can’t say if it is a good win or not. I remember at the time thinking that it was basically a right actor in the right role at the right time kind of win, nothing more and nothing less. Laura Linney’s Lady Macbeth twist was my favorite performance in the film, but it didn’t have a chance. 

    As for the year, there were a lot of good ones that got overlooked. My ballot would have looked something like this:

    Sean Astin, ROTK
    Alec Baldwin, The Cooler
    Billy Boyd, ROTK
    Bobby Canavale, The Station Agent 
    Peter Saarsgard, Shattered Glass 

    ReplyCopy URL
    Madson Melo
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 25th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104367

    Kevin Bacon was a better supporting actor in his own movie. He won because he was a veteran actor (and loved) in a weak field with no real contenders (The Last Samurai? Del Toro winning so soon? In America (who saw this one)? Alec Baldwin? HAHAHA)

    ReplyCopy URL
    Beau S.
    Member
    Joined:
    Feb 10th, 2013
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104368

    You are all mistaking this thread for a “Best Supporting Actor 2003” thread.

    I’m asking you guys if there are any other wins like this one, where a large amount of people (not everybody) dislike it but struggle to find a performance worthy of beating it.

    As Halo_Insider pointed out, John Mills is a pretty good example. I would say that Gene Hackman should have won but that could have potentially impacted the Oscar future negatively and hurt Hackman’s chances of winning for The French Connection, a much better performance. On an unrelated note, I don’t think he should have won for Bonnie and Clyde as I don’t find the men very memorable in that film, it’s entirely the girls’ (Parsons and the great Faye Dunaway’s) show. 

    ReplyCopy URL
    DamianWayne
    Member
    Joined:
    Sep 12th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #104369

    2011 and Christopher Plummer comes to my mind. I didn’t think his performance was all that great but the other 4 contenders deserved it even less.

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 52 total)
Reply To: “The Tim Robbins Syndrome”

You can use BBCodes to format your content.
Your account can't use Advanced BBCodes, they will be stripped before saving.

Similar Topics
Spenser... - Aug 16, 2017
Movies
Tegan - Aug 16, 2017
Movies