Is Michael Sheen crazy to take on 'Frost/Nixon' costar Frank Langella in the lead Oscars race?
Looks like Universal has decided to put Michael Sheen in the lead actor race opposite "Frost/Nixon" costar Frank Langella, which is surprising for many reasons.
Yes, sure, they both really are leads, with Sheen actually having more face time and lines of dialogue to speak as British talk-show host David Frost compared to Langella as the disgraced U.S. president he infamously interviewed on TV in 1977: Richard Nixon.
That means nothing at the Oscars. Denzel Washington had less screen time and dialogue than "Training Day" costar Ethan Hawke, but won in lead while Hawke had to settle for a losing nomination in supporting. Forest Whitaker won best actor over "The Last King of Scotland" costar James McAvoy, who had more screen time and dialogue too, but was placed in the supporting slot where he wasn't even nominated.
When "Frost/Nixon" was still a stage play, Langella and Sheen were both nominated for best lead actor at London's Olivier Awards. They lost to Rufus Sewell ("Rock N Roll"). At the Tonys when Sheen dared to take on Langella again, only Langella got nominated — and he won.
You'd think Sheen would be used to ducking down to the supporting category at film awards. Obviously, he had the lead male role in "The Queen" two years ago, but he was nonetheless pushed down to supporting, earning a nomination from BAFTA and a win from the Los Angeles Film Critics Assn. However, Sheen was snubbed at the Globes and Oscars.
Now that Langella and Sheen compete for best actor at the Academy Awards, Sheen may pay a terrible price for daring to take on a costar with the most demonstrative role based upon a real (and famous) person. Remember what happened to the actresses in "The Hours"? Sure, Nicole Kidman had the least dialogue and face time of all three women, but Julianne Moore wisely conceded that Kidman, as novelist Virginia Woolf, had the role of primary focus and so she ducked down to supporting where she was nominated at the Oscars. Meryl Streep dared to take on Kidman in the lead race. Both were nominated at the Globes, but when Kidman won there, Streep wasn't even nominated at the Oscars.
Sheen may drop down to supporting later this derby season, but the worst thing a star can do is create category confusion for academy members, who can put an actor in any category they want. The Oscars aren't like the Golden Globes and SAG Awards, which decide category placement themselves.
There was a chance Leonardo DiCaprio might've won an Oscar two years ago when "The Departed" won best picture if he hadn't confused voters with where they should place him. Oscar voters love to dole out an acting award along with the best-pic prize — like Russell Crowe ("Gladiator") in lead or Javier Bardem ("No Country for Old Men") in supporting. Yes, Mark Wahlberg was nommed in supporting, but, come on, he's not taken that seriously as a thespian. Wahlberg never had a real shot to win. Among "The Departed" players, it was Leo's gold to grab if he wanted it, but his handlers couldn't decide what category to put him him since he also starred in "Blood Diamond" that year.
Leo was placed in lead for both films at Golden Globes, BAFTA and Critics Choice, but went supporting for "Departed" at SAG. He scored noms for both films at the Globes and Critics Choice — and lost. He lost at BAFTA too, where he was only nominated for "Departed." At SAG he had losing bids for lead ("Blood Diamond") and supporting ("Departed"). At the Oscars, he ended up getting nominated for the wrong flick ("Blood Diamond"). No doubt Leo received lots of votes for "The Departed" too, but since they were split between lead and supporting and because actors can only get nominated once per category, his role in "Departed" got snubbed. Had it been firmly defined as lead or supporting role (preferably supporting), he might've caught a ride on "Departed's" victory wave.
There are many examples of films earning competing nominations in one category for its stars, with all ending up as losers: "Mutiny on the Bounty," "All About Eve," "Giant," "The Defiant Ones," "Suddenly Last Summer," "Becket," "Midnight Cowboy," "Sleuth," "The Turning Point," "The Dresser," and "Thelma & Louise."
In general, when costars are nominated against each other and one manages to prevail, the winner is the nominee with the flashier role: — Maximilian Schell over Spencer Tracy in "Judgment at Nuremberg," Peter Finch over William Holden in "Network," and Shirley MacLaine over Debra Winger in "Terms of Endearment."
That's also true of "Amadeus" depending on how you define flashy: F. Murray Abraham beat his louder but less high-brow costar Tom Hulce, thus appealing to academy snobbery. Interestingly, Sheen made his Broadway debut in the role of Mozart in a revival of "Amadeus" in 1999. For portraying Salieri, David Suchet got a Tony nod. Sheen did not.
(Universal)




Interesting article Tom.
I hate it when leading roles get nominated in the supporting categories, and it seems to happen more and more lately. I know it's how the game is played, but it's bullshit - denying slots to deserving supporting performances. So I hope Sheen is indeed campaigned as lead.
Also, I agree that it's obvious that Julianne Moore went to supporting for The Hours only because of Far From Heaven. And I'd bet $100 that the studios decided that, not her. I doubt she gave a shit.
Posted by: richard | October 06, 2008 at 11:14 PM
Meryl Streep's people mistakenly did not submit her for The Hours in any category. That is probably why Salma Hayak got in. She did not "back down" from Nicole Kidman. Too funny. And you write like its the actors themselves making these decisions - dramatic yes, but in reality its the studios, isn't it?
Posted by: Joe | October 06, 2008 at 07:43 PM
I'm happy that Sheen is shooting for a lead actor nomination because that is where the role belongs.
Posted by: dude | October 06, 2008 at 05:06 PM
I think it's more likely that Julianne Moore went supporting for The Hours because she already had lead actress acclaim for Far from Heaven than because of having apprehensions of facing off with Kidman. The nominations she received for The Hours were just gravy, as her real shot was for her better role in Far from Heaven.
Posted by: Élyse | October 06, 2008 at 03:55 PM
Tom, Julianne Moore was not nominated for Supporting Actress at the Golden Globes for The Hours (the nominees were Susan Sarandon, Cameron Diaz, Queen Latifah, and Kathy Bates, with Meryl Streep winning); she reaped nominations at the BAFTAs, SAG and Academy Awards.
Posted by: David Acacia | October 06, 2008 at 03:36 PM