October 16, 2015 at 4:28 pm #196064
Tatum O’Neal, Hailee Steinfeld, Haley Joel Osment, Mary Badham, Patty Duke, Anna Pacquin, Abigail Breslin, Timothy Hutton – all leads or co-leads in their films (in the golden age, young actors got miniature Oscars)
Jason Tremblay is clearly a lead actor in Room yet he is being touted for Supporting Actor. Can’t the governing board simply stop all the catgegory fraud this year and overrule all these ridiculous category placements? (Tremblay and Mara are the glaring ones, but also Paul Dano – I would love for him to get a nomination but he is truly the co-lead in Love & Mercy). I know these are two different subjects, child actors almost always in the wrong category (Justin Henry was correctly a Supporting Actor, as was Jodie Foster in Taxi Driver), and all the category fraud this year…. can academy members decide to place Tremblay in Lead? How is the ballot put together and why do the producers of the movies seem to have the final say-so???October 16, 2015 at 5:14 pm #196066
We can argue some of these, such as Abigail Breslin and Anna Paquin (I would consider both supporting), but Hailee Steinfeld’s nomination is a JOKE in supporting. She was in EVERY SINGLE SCENE. And not as a secondary character, but as a lead one. I don’t know why there isn’t a rule for this. Like if you are in the movie as a centric character with plenty of screentime, you simply cannot be nominated in supporting. This rule would not let child actors, or any actors for that matter (Christoph Waltz in Django Unchained or Rooney Mara, Alicia Wikander this year – everyone?) compete in supporting.
I just feel like we are bashing Jacki Weaver’s Silver Linings Playbook nomination a lot, but in the end, her performance is truly the supporting one, the real supporting one, and category is for performances like hers, not performances like Steinfeld’s.October 17, 2015 at 4:33 am #196067
Child/teenage actors in a leading role tend to go supporting when they have an adult actor fronted as a lead. Quvenzhane Wallis and Keisha Castle-Hughes had no adult actor to hide behind, so they had to go lead.
If a huge star and Oscar winner like Julia Roberts is forced to go supporting, then there is no hope for this to be fixed. Category fraud is alive and well!October 17, 2015 at 5:50 am #196068
It’s always been a problem with the Oscars, and the most egregious example is by far Timothy Hutton for me. I don’t understand who they thought the lead of Ordinary People was, because there is no way around the fact that he was the central character. Hailee Steinfeld at least had the precedent of John Wayne’s lead win to fall back on. She was without a doubt a co-lead, and could honestly have been nominated in lead if they’d taken the chance. Haven’t seen Tremblay yet, so I’ll reserve judgment, but everything I’ve heard points to him being a proper lead, though there’s probably no way he would get in there this year.October 17, 2015 at 6:11 am #196069
Timothy Hutton was 20 when he won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar. Playing an adolescent is different than being one.October 17, 2015 at 7:52 am #196070
Hailee was just as lead as Timothy Hutton. And unlike Hutton, her performance was hammy.October 17, 2015 at 7:58 am #196071
I agree that Jacob Tremblay going for supporting is a joke. I have not seen the movie yet but if it is like the book then he should be in pratically every scene and it is Ma (Brie) who goes off the screen for a bit. If anyone she should be supporting.
Sigh. Well, if this helps the kid get a nomination then I guess I will stop bitching but it is freud for sure.October 17, 2015 at 7:58 am #196072
First of all, his name is Jacob Tremblay, not Jason.
Second, as others have said already, it’s easier to get a kid nominated in supporting versus leading, and I imagine they find it easier to justify when there is another name adult actor in a co-lead role that they can push in that category.
I definitely don’t think it’s right to fraud a leading role as supporting just because they’re a kid, but I can see why studios would take advantage of that when campaiging.October 17, 2015 at 8:13 am #196073
Agree that Tremblay is lead in Room but don’t have much issue in category placement. He is just a kid. The way they vote for best actor is to vote for the biggest names carrying the biggest films in the biggest roles. Maybe if voting patterns were different I’d be upset about a kid not being campaigned correctly but this is Hollywood, the land of make believe.October 17, 2015 at 8:21 am #196074
1. Supporting is easier category to get the nomination
2. It’s not the same 2-Oscar nominee movie than 3-Oscar nominee movie
4. It all translates in more money for the film
But if you want a deeper read, take this:October 17, 2015 at 4:57 pm #196075
It really hate the way category fraud has become epidemic these days.
Years ago you used to get the odd person every few years but now it’s an annual event.
I see no reason why it is left up to the producers to decide placement. It would be perfectly easy for the step in an adjudicate on contentious roles.October 17, 2015 at 9:28 pm #196076
Love this topic.
I was stunned when I watched ‘Ordinary People’ and read that Hutton won supporting.October 18, 2015 at 10:05 am #196077
Supporting is the ageist “ghettoization” of minors and very young actors. It sucks, really. And it spills over all the freaking time.
Until the Academy actually writes down some ‘rules’ of this category game, and would I ever love to be a fly on the wall for that meeting of brainiacs, it isnt going to change anytime soon.October 18, 2015 at 10:33 am #196078
Keisha Castle-Hughes was actually campaigned as a supporting actress and nominated for SAG there. It was a rare occasion that the Academy didn’t buy that cheating placement and correctly put her in leading actress. In the same year, Evan Rachel Wood in Thirteen had been touted as a leading actress all season long and almost got nominated for Oscar. I wonder if Holly Hunter hadn’t been a contender in supporting actress, would there have been an attempt to put Wood there?