Leading Actor 1994

No rants, just films. Haven't seen two of these, so I'm excited to watch those. Let's do it.

1994 Best Actor

Tom Hanks - Forrest Gump

The big question surrounding this win is whether or not Tom Hanks deserved to win his second Best Actor Oscar in a row. Now, I'll have to watch Philadelphia again since it's been awhile but I know that one had an important message behind it. This was just a crowd pleaser of a film with some minor messages behind it but nothing like the AIDS/Homosexual thing behind his first win. There's no doubt that Tom Hanks is a great actor. He shows wide range in his performances and smart choices in them, as well. I read that Hanks mirrored his distinct way of talking in this film after the little boy who played his younger version. Instead of coming up with his own accent, he matched the kid so there would be continuity from young to old Gump. That just shows his dedication and how good of an actor he really is. I also think this is the performance everyone remembers he won an Oscar for and most people would probably struggle remembering the first one which says a lot about the lasting appeal of his Gump character. Hanks gets to do everything in this performance, too, which is probably great for any actor. He plays football, he plays a soldier, he meets all kinds of famous people, he gets to play this sweet, loving, caring man who finds the good in everyone. Lots of variety and a testament to Hanks that he can be so many things and still deliver a good performance. If I sound a bit non enthused about this one, it's kind of accurate. I mean, it's Tom Hanks as Forrest Gump and we all know it's a good performance in a well liked film for his second Oscar. Hard to hate on him and I don't feel enough love to sit here and write a super glowing review. It is what it is and I just want to leave it at that. I don't know if this will be my winner yet, so let's wait and see.

Morgan Freeman - The Shawshank Redemption

I wanted to be like this is the performance that really launched Freeman's career, but that would be ignoring his roles in Oscar Best Picture Winners Driving Miss Daisy and Unforgiven. So Freeman didn't need much help to get recognized and nominated. It was simply a matter of time. This may have launched his narration career, though, which is totally legit. He might not be voicing those VISA commercials if not for this film. The big thing to think about when it comes to Freeman's nomination and performance is that it's really a coin flip between him and Tim Robbins. They are both great and they both carry the film. I slightly prefer Robbins because his character is a bit mysterious and little more interesting because of that. However, Freeman is buoyed by his narration which becomes like it's own character. For a lot of his screen time, Freeman is reactionary to Robbins which makes his performance seem more Supporting. He's sort of a leader in the prison and takes a liking to Robbins and we see them interact, with the focus on Robbins. Freeman is just off to the side, never quite fading to the background because his presence keeps him firmly out front. Both Freeman and Robbins have a warm relationship, one that is mostly full of unspoken respect for each other and is seen as a very manly relationship. The two have excellent chemistry and lend a certain effective quality to their performances. Towards the end, the film turns itself over to Freeman with Robbins out of the picture. The film reaches it's emotional zenith at this time, so Freeman benefits from the viewer swelling up with emotions. He does an admirable job of keeping us emotional, too. Hard to argue against Freeman being in this group and no real point in wanting Robbins to be nominated instead because both do a great job with their performances. It's a good performance in a well liked film.

Nigel Hawthorne - The Madness of King George

I had always wondered what kind of performance this would be when looking at the category. Hawthorne is not someone I knew and would not have been able to put a face to the name so I was curious if this was just a veteran nomination or some token thing for him. After watching this wonderful little film, I have to say that Hawthorne very much belongs in this group and there is nothing token about his nomination at all. He plays King George III and he is a booming presence in this film. King George starts going a little nutty (which scholars now think was because of porphyria, though some still think it was some unknown mental illness) and his son and some other political players want to take control of power. King George eventually comes out of it and goes back to ruling. The character is probably every actor's wet dream. George is larger than life before the illness and with the issue becomes even more larger than life. Hawthorne portrays all this beautifully because it's an easy role to let get out of control and become a farce but Hawthorne keeps it natural never letting the character get the better of him. When we first meet George, Hawthorne has this commanding, regal presence while also being quite hilarious as well. It's a great introduction to both George and Hawthorne. The character allows Hawthorne to do all kinds of acting from the stern leader to roaring anger to reading Shakespeare to acting wild and crazy to being kind and tender with his wife to being fully aware of the political machinations going on in his absence to just generally having good, comedic fun. The performance goes all over the place and Hawthorne makes it all fit together nicely and feel natural which I think is the key to why it's such a good performance. The crazy antics never feel too much and I certainly didn't think it was making fun of the King or of the illness, it was measured and fully believable. Hawthorne still remains dignified as he goes through the antics of the illness. Even throughout the film, Hawthorne is very funny in that sly sort of British way and I loved it. It's a performance I wasn't expecting but am very much pleased at how good it was and how much I enjoyed it. Hawthorne more than holds his own against the stars in this category and could possibly be my winner.

Paul Newman - Nobody's Fool

Pretty sure no one remembers this Paul Newman nomination. I love the hell out of Paul Newman, including his salsas and dips. But I had never heard of this until the project and when I finally watched it, realized this wasn't quintessential Newman. I wouldn't say this is a must watch unless you are a huge Paul Newman fan or a crazy guy like me watching all the acting nominations. It's not a bad performance by any means, it's just that it's obviously a step down from what we know Newman can deliver. It's also an older performance and has the stink of a veteran nomination surrounding it. It doesn't feel like a can't miss performance, either, that was going to get nominated anyway. I know I'm making this sound like the worst performance ever but it's actually quite entertaining to some degree. Newman was able to make me laugh out loud with his character which goes a long way with me. He plays an older guy who ran out on his family years ago and is living in the next town over and then his son comes back into his life and Newman discovers he's got a grandson. He pays more attention to the grandson and also his son by extension. He also works for Bruce Willis and flirts with his wife while also trying to sue Willis for workers compensation for his bum knee. He also keeps stealing Willis' snow blower and torments the local cop (Philip Seymour Hoffman) and is generally kind of an asshole. But he's Paul Newman so he makes his asshole nature likable and entertaining. It's a convoluted plot as you can tell from my description which doesn't touch on a couple other topics. Still, it's pretty entertaining and it's a film and performance that grows on you even if it isn't classic Newman work.

John Travolta - Pulp Fiction

This performance put John Travolta back on the map and gave him a second wind and it's quite easy to see why it did so. Travolta plays Vincent Vega and is just plain cool. He has the slicked back hair, the black suit, casually talks about nonsense while holding a big gun and is funny to boot. I think one of the main reasons his performance works so well is that both he and Samuel L. Jackson have this amazing, natural chemistry. They just seem like two guys who have been working with each other for years and have a deep understanding of what the other is all about. They are like an odd couple that are so at ease with each other that when they argue it's comical instead of dramatic. They each make the others performance that much better. Travolta is also very calm and cool during the whole film, minus the overdose scene of course. But he just kinda takes things in and goes with the flow in his laid back style. When he accidentally shoots a guy in the face it's as if he accidentally spilled coffee on someone because of how Travolta plays it and it's hilarious and demented all at the same time. Travolta comes across as incredibly likable and a lot of that has to do with how well he interacts with everyone else in the film. He and Uma have great chemistry just like with Jackson and even in the few meetings with the other characters, his genuineness shines through. It's definitely a strong performance that sort of sneaks up on you as you watch it because it might not register as easily as Jackson's performance or some of the other more notable characters but by the end you are left wishing you could see more of Travolta and his character. It's a fun performance and one I'm glad Tarantino plucked Travolta out of his funk to play Vega because I can't see anyone else portraying that character as good as he did.


Another really tough Best Actor group to choose from. Again I dislike none of these performances which tells you just how good they all are. I guess my 5th would be Newman because it's lesser Newman even though it kinda grew on me and it's a very likable performance. I wouldn't mind watching it again just because. My 4th would Freeman because it just wasn't his time to win and because he's good but not exceptional, which is an important factor in this group. Travolta would be my 3rd because he's just so cool in this film and a natural for Tarantino's dialogue. Great rapport with Samuel L. Jackson for a really good performance. Now the tough part for me. I loved the hell out of Hawthorne's performance. It kinda blew me away and I wasn't expecting to like it so much. Then there's Hanks' second win in a row. Maybe it Hanks fatigue but I'm leaning towards Hawthorne. Gump is an iconic character and one that any actor would be proud to have on their resume. It's entered the public consciousness and is always remembered fondly when you say Tom Hanks. It's a fine win but my heart is saying Hawthorne is my winner because I just frankly loved the hell out of it. Maybe I'll look back on this and change my mind but for now, it's Hawthorne. A surprise for everyone, I'm sure.

Oscar Winner: Tom Hanks - Forrest Gump
My Winner:  Nigel Hawthorne - The Madness of King George
Tom Hanks
John Travolta
Morgan Freeman
Paul Newman