Could Leo — egads — win for the 'wrong' movie?
"I don't care if it's the 'wrong' movie! I voted for Leo anyway!" an indignant Oscar voter fumed the other day.
That's turning out to be a commonly held view. While trotting around Hollywood chatting up lots of academy members, I'm hearing LOTS of votes for Leo DiCaprio — and, of course, Peter O'Toole and Forest Whitaker. But let's stay focused on the Leo scenario. For months Oscarlogists have been slamming Warner Bros. for hyping Leo's chances for "Blood Diamond," insisting that the studio was losing Leo an Oscar while failing to properly push his truly worthy work in "The Departed," which Warner Bros. also produced. It's true that Leo gave a more impressive turn in "Departed," but he has less screen time, so the studio pushed him down into supporting for that role when category declarations had to be made for the Screen Actors Guild in November. Surely, studio exex secretly hoped for one of those Jamie Foxx/ Holly Hunter combos — resulting in two nominations in one year.
The problem with that plan, as many kudos observers pointed out, was that, when stars score dual bids, they tend to win for the lead one and "Blood Diamond" isn't, they posited, the stuff of Oscars. It's a showy role because Leo slices off three thick inches of ham parading as a South African accent and manages to keep it on his plate for, well, most of the movie anyway, but there isn't much real fat on the role. The movie is a thriller. Those rarely win Oscars. But there is a notable exception to the Dual Bid Rule: Jessica Lange won in the supporting slot for "Tootsie" when she was also nommed in lead for "Frances."
Then, on Dec. 17, Warner Bros. suddenly had a change of heart and a new "For Your Consideration" ad appeared in the trades pushing Leo back up to lead for "The Departed." The Golden Globes nominated him in lead for both flicks. Their rules allow that. But the Oscars' don't. So on the eve of Academy Award nominations, many gurus expected Leo to pop up in lead for "Departed." When — o, shockeroo! — he reaped a lead bid for "Blood Diamond" and nothing in supporting for "Departed," many kudos seers wrote off his chances. Kaput. They focused on Forest Whitaker instead, considering he's won everything under the firmament. And maybe O'Toole. But many gurus forgot how vulnerable Forest is at the Oscars where villainous roles rarely win, especially when they're really supporting turns. Anthony Hopkins pulled it off because he was in a best-pic winner. And, as a result of such Oscar amnesia, few gurus have been taking Leo seriously. Till now. There are suddenly rumblings all over town about the surprising rally of votes behind him, even if the surge is for the "wrong" film. Many people feel Leo's finally just due, period. It wouldn't be the first time a star won for the wrong flick. Let's remember that famous quote of Oscar's biggest winner, Katharine Hepburn, who said you always win for the wrong role. It happened recently for Sean Penn, who deserved the Oscar for "21 Grams," but got it for his smug and indulgent pouting in "Mystic River." It's a shame that poor George Clooney will be remembered in the history books for his role in the unwatchable "Syriana."
What do YOU think? Click on the "Comments" link below and pipe in! (I think Peter O'Toole will win, but you already know that.)
Photos: Many Oscar gurus say Warner Bros. confused Oscar voters by making too many switches in Leo's Oscar campaigns. At left, "The Departed's" "For Your Consideration" ad in the tradepapers grouped all of its stars together under the vague heading "The Actors." A few weeks later, Leo was separated from — and promoted above — the others. (Warner Bros.)
Excuse the rudeness, but "Syriana" is unwatchable if you've got the attention span of a 10 year old. As Ebert among many others pointed out, just because a serious film takes more than one viewing is not count against it. What does this have to do with DiCaprio? He's made a career of complex roles that have been celebrated because he's likable and "cute" etc etc. But take the man seriously -- his roles also are worth taking time to consider. Maybe even looking at more than once. Just popping off opinions without a second's thought do nothing good for the industry.
Posted by: Kent | February 24, 2007 at 02:22 AM
"[V]illainous roles rarely win, especially when they're really supporting turns."
You forgot about Denzel Washington in "Training Day."
Posted by: Mark | February 23, 2007 at 10:47 PM
Thank you, Sean, for mentioning Teresa Wright and Barry Fitzgerald.
Regarding Leo, he's been grooming his acting chops at least since Gangs of New York. Though this probably isn't his year, he'll get more chances in the future.For now, he can enjoy the fact that landing a lot of juicy roles.
Posted by: Pierre de Plume | February 23, 2007 at 08:50 AM
I love Sean Penn, but thought he was overrated, in "Mystic River". It was a movie that made me feel I just wasted a couple of hours, as the movie didn't affect me. I also thought Penn deserved the oscar for "21 Grams". But the movie was not traditional enough.
Peter O'Toole, if he wins, will be the most satisfying of all that evening. But I'll have to read about it. Truthfully, I haven't watched the oscars for several years. And I used to be a total fanatic!..at least until I realized it was just a popularity contest.
I also hope Scorsese wins for his sake, and mine. It would meant that I won't have to see him agonizing over another loss!
Whitaker didn't win all the Best Actor awards. The man who played Borat won at least three Best Actor awards in various cities.
Posted by: AlM | February 22, 2007 at 11:21 PM
I love Sean Penn, but thought he was overrated, in "Mystic River". It was a movie that made me feel I just wasted a couple of hours, as the movie didn't affect me. I also thought Penn deserved the oscar for "21 Grams". But the movie was not traditional enough.
Peter O'Toole, if he wins, will be the most satisfying of all that evening. But I'll have to read about it. Truthfully, I haven't watched the oscars for several years. And I used to be a total fanatic!..at least until I realized it was just a popularity contest.
I also hope Scorsese wins for his sake, and mine. It would mean that I won't have to see him agonizing over another loss!
Whittaker didn't win all the Best Actor awards. The man who played Borat won at least three Best Actor awards in various cities.
Posted by: AlM | February 22, 2007 at 11:08 PM
I would be jumping up and down if Leo wins because he deserves -- how many times does he have to be overshadowed by someone else's performance. He was completely overshadowed for his very deserving turn in The Aviator -- for which he should have won and This year he's got two films that garnered 10 nominations.
I don't think he's going to win, I almost think that this is just tom trying to get us excited that there might be someone other than Forest's name to be called. Unlikely, he's won every award -- is this the first time that an actor has won for being the sole nominee of a film?
Leonardo is SO good in BOTH films that I find it difficult that voters have chosen anyone but him -- so what if it is the wrong film -- he is much more leading man in blood diamond than in the departed and even Forest in Scotland.
Posted by: jake | February 22, 2007 at 09:28 PM
I would love for Leo to win! But I think he's one of those young, good looking guys that don't win Best Actor Oscars because the old guys that usually vote are too threatened by them. But if anyone is "due" an Oscar this year, it's Peter O'Toole. Which makes me wonder if Forrest and Peter split the votes and Leo really does win. I think I read an article earlier today where one Academy member said they voted for Leo because they were sick of hearing about how great Forrest was. I don't know. I am keeping my fingers crossed that Forrest and Peter do split the votes and Leo does win. He totally deserves it fro Blood Diamond. I think he totally did get it for the right movie. He was great in The Departed, but he was even better in Blood Diamond. That to me was his best acting job ever, even beating out The Aviator. His win would totally be the biggest upset and would have everyone talking the next day.
Posted by: Anna | February 22, 2007 at 09:26 PM
I think Leo should totally win, but for "The Departed," not "Blood Diamond." Forest Whitaker was amazing in "The Last King of Scotland" and should certainly not be overlooked. The only actor better than both of them is Peter O'Toole, who is not only "due" but also very deserving for his role in "Venus."
Leo is not "due" for an Oscar simply because he is finally giving Oscar-worthy performances. He is just only now being a true contender for the award.
And let's not forget the fact that Jack Nicholson and Matt Damon were both horribly, shamelessly and despicably overlooked for their strong, fantastic performances in "The Departed." I was personally furious that the only other person nominated for that movie was Mark Wahlberg, who gave the worst and smallest performance in the movie, even if it was his best performance to date. Alec Baldwin's performance was far more deserving of an Oscar nom than Mark's.
Posted by: RickyInBurbank | February 22, 2007 at 05:30 PM
"Many people feel Leo's finally just due, period." is this true Tom? That Leo is more "due" than Peter O'Toole and Forest Whitaker. Let's just compare Leo and Peter. In terms of experience, years on stage and filmography, oeuvre, you mean people are so naive to think that Leo deserves the Oscar more than Peter?!?!? Hmmm... Let's see.... Peter's first feature film was Lawrence of Arabia where he was nominated for Best Actor.. Leo's first film was? What? A boy's Life was it? Or perhaps we could mention What's Eating Gilbert Grape? Now tell me.. or perhaps Tom you tell THEM who is more due: Leo - Blood Diamond, The Departed, The Aviator, Catch Me If You Can, Gangs of New York, Don's Plum,The Beach, Celebrity, The Man in the Iron Mask, Titanic, Marvin's Room , Romeo + Juliet, Total Eclipse, The Basketball Diaries, The Quick and the Dead, The Foot Shooting Party (?!), What's Eating Gilbert Grape,
This Boy's Life, Critters 3 (!?!?) or Peter - Venus, Troy, The Last Emperor, My Favorite Year, The Stunt Man, Caligula, Zulu Dawn, Man of La Mancha, The Ruling Class, Murphy's War, Goodbye, Mr. Chips, The Lion in Winter, How to Steal a Million, What's New, Pussycat, Lord Jim, Becket & Lawrence of Arabia! Tell Me! Tell Them! Bwahahaha! If ever i would be granted super powers I would take the ability to decide on every award show on earth - which in an ideal world would mean L.A. Confidential winning over Titanic, No Tom Hanks or Forrest Gump, or Ron Howard movies winning, Glenn Close would already have an Oscar for Fatal Attraction and Dangerous Liaisons, TImberlake and Beyonce won't win gazillion grammys and be asked to perform every time and Jennifer Lopez won't have to present the nominees and winner for best song or best musical score in any award show!!!
Posted by: david | February 22, 2007 at 05:10 PM
Wait. So a third time nominee, and only second in leading, is more due than an 8 time nominee, all of which were lead, and living legend?
Posted by: AJ | February 22, 2007 at 04:48 PM
The predominantly male voting ampas members do not usually give the young "whippersnapper" guys the oscar in the lead actor category. Maybe they feel they haven't paid their dues or there's jealousy or whatever, but only one actor in 78 years under thirty has won a Best Actor oscar--Adrien Brody, and he was 29. (I think Richard Dreyfus had just turned 30 when he won.) That is why I think Leo will not win. (Brody "did" win in a year with two other actors battling it out, so who knows, maybe the scenario will have Leo on top in a similar scenario.)
Posted by: MartinP. | February 22, 2007 at 02:19 PM
I would love to see Leo win and having seen both The Departed and Blood Diamond I do think the Academy's acting branch got this one right, IMO Leo is more deserving for Blood Diamond. I agree with the poster who said Matt Damon was more deserving for The Departed than Leo and I also agree completely with Tom O'Neil that Syriana was an "unwatchable" movie.
Go Leo!!
Posted by: Stinger | February 22, 2007 at 01:05 PM
I know that many feel Leo was better in The Departed but I thought he gave an equally fine performance in Blood Diamond . His last scene in Blood Diamond is heartbreaking but in a completely unsentimental way.
I would love to see him win. But I would be shocked, too.
Posted by: daveylow | February 22, 2007 at 12:31 PM
Please-Matt Damon out acted Dicaprio to the extreme in Departed and DiCaprio was magnificent in Blood Diamond. One of the best performances of the year even if I think DiCaprio was better in Aviator overall.
I think that you are way way off on Sean Penn. I know you hate Mystic River and that only str8 hetero testerone driven male critics went nuts for that but that was truly Penn's finest peformance of his career and he was wasted in 21 Grams.
Posted by: Ben3jen3jen | February 22, 2007 at 12:24 PM
The Departed was the better film. But, I thought they nominated him for the right role, although he was excellent in both. I guess I'm in the minority on this one.
Posted by: Scott | February 22, 2007 at 11:37 AM
If DiCaprio wins for Blood Diamond because people feel he's "due", it wouldn't only be for the wrong movie, it would also be for the wrong REASON.
I thought people were voting for 74-year old Peter O'Toole because he's "due". Now they're voting for 32-year olds for the same reason? This is getting, how shall we say, out of hand.
Posted by: Brendan | February 22, 2007 at 11:16 AM
Me again. Also Fay Bainter for Jezebel won with a lead nomination for another film. I refer you to your article of last year:
http://goldderby.latimes.com/awards_goldderby/2006/09/oscar_quiz_who_.html
Posted by: Sean | February 22, 2007 at 10:00 AM
Jessica Lange is not the only exception. Until Al Pacino did it in lead, no one had won with that combo and it was always the supporting role that had gotten the gold. Teresa Wright won for Mrs. Miniver this way, and Barry Fitzgerald for Going My Way. Emma Thompson and Sigourney Weaver have also lost both their bids in the same night (1989 and 1994 respectively).
Posted by: Sean | February 22, 2007 at 09:57 AM
I would be DELIGHTED if Leo's name was called for Best Actor. It would be the highlight of the night. The crowd would gasp. The camera cuts to Marty S. on his feet. Cut to Kate Winslett beaming as she strikes a leaning-from-the-bow pose. A shot of Forrest Whitaker looking decidedly relieved that he doesn't have to unsuccessfully attempt another speech. A quick jump to Helen Mirren looking suddenly nervous. A peak at Peter O'Toole reveals him to be oblivious to everything around him as Abigail Breslin bounces on his knee. The ratings spike, ABC is stoked and, man, have we got ourselves a show........
Posted by: TorontoTom | February 22, 2007 at 09:25 AM