Leading Actor 1960

Going back we start to see these all star lineups where everyone is an acting legend. It's fun to watch these guys work and create that legend status in almost real time.

1960 Best Actor

 

Burt Lancaster - Elmer Gantry

 

I have said over and over how much of a fan I am with Lancaster's acting style. I just love his delivery and presence and it just works for me. It also works for this character who is a traveling salesmen and is a loquacious, wild man who catches a revival act with a pretty woman and decides he wants in on that grift. He weasels his way into Sister Sharon Falconer's (a great Jean Simmons) entourage and lies his way into delivering some testimony. This kind of role is right in Lancaster's wheelhouse because the guy he plays is so over the top and loud and he laughs at everything with a big toothy smile and it doesn't feel weird. It just fits him to a tee. This is a smooth talking, womanizing, manipulating guy who looks for his next play. He has an answer for everything and when called out by a skeptical journalist, he essentially defeats him with scripture and clever lines. Lancaster excels so much in this role because he can just let loose with this character and be so gregarious and charming while being serious at the same time. And it's like the film stands back and lets the viewer judge Gantry because he seems to get away with being a piece of shit to those around him. Lancaster is a force both verbally and physically as he just has that preacher energy and you kinda start feeling his energy. Just a great synergy of Lancaster's talents that resulted in him winning a well deserved Oscar. Definitely a must see for both him and Shirley Jones and Jean Simmons who should have been nominated.

Trevor Howard - Sons and Lovers

You will watch this film and observe this performance and then wonder why was Trevor Howard nominated for what is clearly a barely supporting performance. I may have the answers to that, though it is hard to understand why the Academy does what it does sometimes. This was Howard's only Oscar nomination in his long and illustrious career. You can go look at his filmography and see he is in quite a lot of great films (Brief Encounter, The Third Man, Ryan's Daughter, Superman, Gandhi, to name a few) and kind of realize what is going on. This was a chance to nominate someone the Academy respected and whose previous works they probably loved and wished they had nominated. But also, Howard was top billed in this film and the actual lead of the film, Dean Stockwell (who was pretty good) gets nothing despite doing all the heavy lifting. It just kinda feels like his billing and stature in the film community is what got him nominated and not anything he did onscreen. He plays the drunken, sometimes violent father of Stockwell, who is an artistic young man who wants a better future than just being a coal miner like his dad. Howard really doesn't do all that much in the film. We see him as this rough man who stumbles home drunk at times and assaults his wife and locks her out and then apologizes the next morning by making breakfast. He doesn't approve of Stockwell's artistic desires and is really just the one tie to the old, hard working lifestyle that the film has. Howard also doesn't really do anything amazing in this role. He does what is needed, but you're not looking at this like it's some great piece of acting. You are scratching your head wondering how it got nominated and in this category to boot. The film is worth watching but not for this performance. Go watch his other works to get a better appreciation for his talents.

Jack Lemmon - The Apartment

I feel like I should just change this to a Jack Lemmon fanboy blog because show me a Lemmon performance and I'll never hate it. He's just so fucking good at his craft and I love what he is able to do in every film I see him in. I love that he is equally great at both the comedic side and the dramatic side and when he puts them both together, just look out. This film sees both of those sides coming together. I thought going in that this was a mostly comedic film and it is equally comedic and dramatic. Lemmon seems to relish these dual roles because he knocks them out of the park each time. His comedic timing is impeccable and I have always loved his energy, but his dramatic sense of timing is also so great. He knows when to let a scene breathe and when to reel it in and defer to whoever he is working with. And it never feels insincere. You never feel like some funny man is trying out drama for the first time or some thespian is trying to crack a forced joke. He makes both sides work so well and it makes this film work especially great. He has great chemistry with Shirley MacLaine and it's a delight when both are riffing off each other. It's also nice to see that Lemmon never gives up what he does with his apartment and takes all the blame for MacLaine's issue as his own. It speaks to his character and is just one of those nice acting flourishes from Lemmon. He's got this sweetness and pathos about him that makes you root for him. I feel like I could give every win to my guy here, but there is stiff competition here that I am excited to see play out and figure who is best.

Laurence Olivier - The Entertainer

 

I went into this one completely blind. My guess was Olivier would be playing some entertainer (shocking!) and have issues making it big. Almost correct, but Olivier is playing a third-rate vaudevillian actor whose audience is dwindling. His actual future wife, Joan Plowright (with beautiful, expressive eyes by the way), is his daughter (lol) and our guide to see him struggle to find backing and be relevant. Olivier's character is a scumbag. He cheats on his current wife, doesn't care about his kids, and will do anything for money. When he is found out as a scam artist, the funding is withdrawn and he has to enlist his father to help him who is a vaudeville legend. His dad dies before things can go off and he entertains a paltry audience. Olivier is fantastic in the role, though. Read the previous bit and see me praising him, you're like whaaaat? Not the greatest character, but Olivier does a lot with it. The role was written for him by a progressive playwright who hated the old guard and Olivier challenged him to write something progressive for him. Genius by Olivier to stay relevant as the theater world underwent a revolution and then capitalized on it with this play and then film. Nominated for a Tony and obviously nominated for the Oscar. I love Olivier here because he acts old and has lived in this performance for awhile. Every response and movement is thought through. And his vaudeville persona is put to good use because we can see him as this washed up artist. He is trying to maintain it and keep it going, but that is obviously not succeeding. His character is fun but washed, and we only get the true glorious moments when we see when his funding is dried up or when speaking to his daughter privately. The character has so many dimensions that it can be hard to know what is the true Archie. It's an incredibly interesting character and performance that only Olivier could pull off and make into something digestible. Recommend this to see who Olivier is outside of the Shakespeare stuff.

Spencer Tracy - Inherit the Wind

 

This was Tracy's seventh of his nine nominations throughout the years, so I've got a lot more of him to come including his back to back wins. This film is about the Scopes monkey trial, which was about a guy being prosecuted for teaching evolution in early 1920s Tennessee where it was against the law. Tracy plays the Clarence Darrow character with a different name in the film and is the defense attorney for Scopes. It's a classic trial film and I love these types of films. Tracy is his usual solid self. It's very similar to his Judgment at Nuremberg work and the rest of his later work. It all looks so easy and natural for him where it doesn't look like he's acting at all and just playing himself. Some would call that a problem, but I have enjoyed all of these later performances I have seen. Put this up against Fredric March's heavily put upon and overacted William Jennings Bryan film counterpart and you can easily see the difference in style and tone with the characters. It kinda works, though, as the two butt heads in court and March is the more radical and fervently religious type, so his bombastic performance fits as much as Tracy's measured, pinpoint performance. Unfortunately, the film doesn't really go too in depth with Tracy's character. He's actually religious himself and not an atheist, but this isn't explored at all besides some mention at the end of the film in talking with Gene Kelly's character (who is excellent in this, by the way). This film felt more like two forces or ideas going against each other rather than any kind of character study or an accurate look into a notable historical trial. Still worth watching for Tracy and for being an entertaining trial film, though.

As usual, an excellent group of nominees. The lone head scratcher is Howard, who definitely should not have been nominated. I could see Kirk Douglas getting nominated instead for Spartacus. And if that was the case, I'd be hard pressed to even rank this group. I'll let Lancaster's win stay because I think that was probably some of his best work and just felt like a Burt Lancaster performance. Lemmon just doing what Lemmon always does which is give a performance that in a weak year would win hands down. Just great work from Lemmon, it's unbelievable. Olivier gives us a really interesting character that has all these different dimensions to him and it's fun to watch him work. Tracy is good and this film would make a great double feature with Judgment at Nuremberg. It's also a bit of the same flavor as that performance, so not really ever going to win, but still good. Just another solid year for this category with just a minor slip up. Looking forward to a new decade for sure, though.

Oscar Winner: Burt Lancaster - Elmer Gantry

My Winner: Burt Lancaster - Elmer Gantry

Jack Lemmon

Laurence Olivier

Spencer Tracy 

Trevor Howard

Best Picture 1960

Finally, we are at the end of the 60s and can move on! I'll actually be going modern with finishing up the two most recent years in 2020 and 2021, so that should be fun. But first we have an interesting group of films with some I don't know much about and am hoping, like always, they are some hidden gems.

1960 Best Picture

 

The Apartment

I kind of feel like for any big classic film like this I can just paste the whole I'm so excited to finally watch this film I've been putting off for forever and can't wait to watch it and see what makes it so great. And this is truly one of those films that earns and lives up to the perfect or almost perfect designation and is an honest to God classic that swept 1960 with Oscar, BAFTA, and Golden Globes (the first time ever for that). If all the awards shows were around now, it probably would have had like twenty Best Picture wins. I actually thought it would be more cute and charming, and it is, but it also has some serious dramatic moments I really wasn't expecting. It's more of a dramedy than straight comedy that I was anticipating and it made for a more enjoyable experience. It's a very adult type of film in that it is smart and treats the viewer like an adult and isn't so cutesy with serious topics. It also has some legit great performances from Jack Lemmon and Shirley MacLaine and even the sort of villain figure of Fred MacMurray who was more of a loving father figure and his role upset some folks expecting that. The direction from Billy Wilder is fantastic and I actually loved his decision to basically do zero closeups as it helps set an intimate but not in your face intimate tone that makes the film better. I haven't even said what the film is about yet! It's about Lemmon who is an insurance guy at a big firm in NYC who lends his apartment out to a few executives in the company in hopes of getting promoted. Comedy and drama ensue from that and Lemmon falls for the elevator operator MacLaine who has other things going on. Trying to be vague because it is best to go in blind on this one and just enjoy the story as it reaches its end because the story is satisfying. Honestly, one of the better wins in this category and probably one of the few comedy/drama films that could challenge for tops among all currently now 94 winners. That's a high bar but this film clears it with plenty of room.

The Alamo

I loved these types of films when I was growing up. My Dad is a big Western fan and liked John Wayne, so on lazy Saturdays, films like this or Rio Bravo or She Wore a Yellow Ribbon would be playing and we'd sit and watch before going out to eat with the grandparents. I loved Wayne as an actor and thought he was so cool and all that. Then of course I grew up and you kinda get to know more about the man instead of the star. His politics aside, he was a great and prolific actor who many a young kid saw because he was always in Westerns and war films. This film was his directorial debut and he sank a lot of his own money into it. It was one of the biggest draws of 1960 but only began making money after about ten years. Don't feel like I need to really explain the film. Wayne is kinda miscast as Davy Crockett, but I guess it works in a larger than life kinda way. His militia from Tennessee goes down to Texas to help out against Santa Anna. They hunker down, defend, and then they all die. Heroic stuff. You can argue the actual history and merit of their actions and whether or not they are on the wrong side of history in trying to keep black slavery a thing in that area (among other controversial issues). Lots of good arguments to read online about that, but historical accuracy is not something to expect of Hollywood in the late 50s and early 60s and especially not of the ultra patriotic Wayne. The film looks good enough, not really any flashy scenes or anything truly memorable. Just a film that gets to the point and follows these rag tag group of men as they defend to their last man. In reality, the men who fought at the Alamo were rather cosmopolitan, with many from Europe and a large number were Mexican themselves. The Tennessee folks were actually small in number. The action is done really well, with lots of closeup on the fighting and no skimping on explosions and violence. The end fighting is the best part of the film and makes wading through the by-the-numbers beginning worth it. I don't know if this is really an Oscar worthy film, especially for Best Picture. Maybe the Academy was giving John Wayne some props for his first directed film, seeing as they hadn't yet given him an Oscar. Worth searching out because it is a decent film and has some good performances from Laurence Harvey and Richard Widmark. It's entertaining, just maybe not at an Oscar level.

Elmer Gantry

This film is essentially a film that lets Burt Lancaster, in the title role, go off and do his thing. He is Elmer Gantry, a traveling salesmen who sees a revival with a hot woman (Jean Simmons, who probably should have been nominated for Best Actress) and decides he wants to get into the religious grift. The film really does just allow Lancaster to do what he does best and that's why he won the Oscar for it. It's also why Shirley Jones, as a prostitute who used to know Gantry and then gets her house raided by his morality police and then tries to blackmail him but feels guilty. A complicated role that won the Oscar possibly because she was going against her good girl type, but I enjoyed a ton. The film is interesting because it's kind of against the revival, extreme evangelicalism, religiousness that was an issue. Though this is set in the 1920s, it parallels the 1950/60s at the time and while it doesn't seem to suggest either way is right or wrong, it allows the viewer to do that. Though I do wish the film would have hammered Gantry a bit for his behavior because it is obviously reprehensible garbage and the film seems to excuse his actions. That's my big gripe that this dude should be held accountable for his actions but he slithers out of everything and doesn't really suffer any consequences. This is a great film that feels relevant to today unfortunately because of the loser MAGA folks who eat up bullshit like these people eat up revivalism. Mostly a film to watch for Lancaster's performance but it's a film to make you think and I appreciate those.

Sons and Lovers

 

This was an interesting film because it was the one in this group I knew the least about and also has the most sensual game of cribbage ever filmed. It's an adaptation of a D. H. Lawrence novel, so you know you're probably getting something dealing with relationships and sexuality within an industrial setting. And that's exactly what this film is about. Paul (a possibly miscast Dean Stockwell, who is the only American in the cast because the producers wanted a recognizable name/face for American audiences and who has an iffy accent) is a young man who has an artistic gift and lives in an English coal mining town with his overbearing mother and a drunken, sometimes violent father who doesn't support his artistic notions. He loves a local girl, Miriam, who has a strict mother and views sex as sinful and dirty and prefers to keep their relationship more platonic, much to Paul's chagrin. An older, wealthy man likes one of Paul's paintings and hires him to pursue his gift as his patron. Paul meets Clara (Mary Ure) who is is very independent woman who is separated from her husband, a suffragette, and very in tune with her sexuality. That's where I'll stop because you can see how much is going on even with stuff I left out and the cavalcade of characters continues in ways you might not expect. It's a quick hour and forty minute film that is worth watching because so much intrigue is going on. I actually enjoyed Stockwell's performance, though the critics didn't quite like his casting. Ure is an interesting breath of fresh air and the black and white photography just lends more weight to the story. The story comes from well seasoned stock so it feels a bit more important and serious and may well be why it was chosen for this group. I don't understand Trevor Howard's nomination in Best Actor for playing the father because he barely factors into the film. And I feel like the story could be longer to flesh out some of the details and make things more fluid rather than just having one relationship suddenly end and someone is back in another place (you'll know when you watch). I think it would bring a bit more prestige and gravitas to the film, though I enjoyed it for what it was. Worth watching because I feel this might be a hidden gem for some, this is a mild interest for me.

The Sundowners

 

This film is one of the forgotten nominees that no one ever remembers or brings up when discussing Best Picture films. The actressexual idiots that I read when looking into Glynis Johns nomination all declared the film utterly dull and boring. That's why you watch the films yourself instead of relying on anyone to tell you how to feel about something, including me. I enjoyed this film a lot more than I thought I would which shouldn't be all that surprising with a stacked cast of Deborah Kerr, Robert Mitchum, Peter Ustinov and the aforementioned Johns. It was directed by Fred Zinnemann who was himself an Oscar winner previously and directed a few classic films. The film is a pretty straightforward telling of a family in the Australian Outback who rove around herding sheep all over. Kerr and her son want to settle down, but Mitchum is resistant as he loves the nomadic lifestyle. While herding, they meet up with Ustinov and drive the sheep to a town after escaping a brush fire and there they all settle down for a while. We have seen many films like this in the previous decade of the 50s and before where we follow one family as they go through life's ups and downs. This one just comes with a more exotic locale than simply the American West. What I love most about the film is the strength of the acting and the characters. It is pretty great all the way through. Kerr was nominated for Best Actress and you've got some really entertaining turns from Ustinov and Johns while Mitchum is his normally solid self. The supporting and tertiary characters are pretty good, also, which helps solidify the story for me. I was never bored and didn't find this film to be dull at all. It's got a good mix of comedy and action and drama to keep anyone entertained. There's a lot more that goes on once the family reaches the town with sheep shearing and horse racing, but I kinda love that the film doesn't really have a neatly wrapped up happy ending. It forgoes that for one where the family comes together again but still will have to continue struggling and I appreciated that it didn't just end in the most obvious way. The film looks great and of course the Australian Outback makes for a beautiful backdrop for a story. This is why we watch things for ourselves in case other people lead us astray and keep us from seeing something we actually enjoy.

A pretty decent way to end a decade. The Alamo was something I enjoyed as a kid, but never thought of it as a Best Picture quality film and I still don't. The weak link for this year. Sons and Lovers was surprisingly modern feeling to an extent and had some good performances. Elmer Gantry was a bombastic film for Burt Lancaster and got you thinking about how easy it is to take advantage of people with religion and we are still seeing that today. The Sundowners surprised me with how much I truly enjoyed it. Kind of a simple, straightforward story that shows life down under with some really wonderfully solid performances. And then The Apartment is an almost perfect film that has a lot to love about it and would be around the top of all time best Best Picture winners. I am really surprised, though, that Spartacus and Exodus didn't get nominated. Maybe subject matter plays a part, but they were the highest grossing film and a top 5 grossing film, respectively. I wonder what the story was behind them missing out in this category. Great year to end a decade and I can't wait to start the 50s, just have to make a little detour first.

Oscar Winner: The Apartment

My Winner: West Side Story

The Sundowners

Elmer Gantry

Sons and Lovers

The Alamo

Leading Actress 1960

Some big names here that we are going to start to see more of as we keep going back in time, so I'm looking forward to these below. Taylor's first Oscar I know has some controversy attached to it, but I'm hoping it's at least a good performance. Let's see.

1960 Best Actress

 

Elizabeth Taylor - BUtterfield 8

 

What is crazy about this nomination and win is that Taylor herself hated this film. Loathed it. It was the final film done to satisfy her contract with MGM after some legal wrangling and she didn't want to do it. So she did it along with her new husband Eddie Fisher, who is not very good in the film. It's about a call girl, prostitute, whore; whatever you want to call her. She is mad that a john gave her like $250 and her dress was ruined and so she steals a mink coat at his place. That john is Laurence Harvey and the two reconnect and start a relationship that damages his relationship with his wife. There are some complications but that is the film. I have always hated the title of this film and realize it had to do with an area code where BU and 8 equals 288. Also, the only reason Taylor won the Oscar here is because she was on death's door, literally dying, and that is why everyone voted for her. Like no shit, she had some pneumonia or something and was dying and the Academy was like oh, no! We haven't rewarded her yet so let's do it for this truly awful performance. And her accepting the Oscar was like this Jesus rising from the dead moment. The film is terrible and Taylor does nothing to make it great. It's just a whore who tries to get away with being awful and is confronted with her reality. Watch the film to see how it ends, but it's not good. That previous sentence seems harsh, but it is accurate for the film and the performance so I'm letting it stand. This in no way deserves a nomination, let alone a fucking Oscar win! It's crazy that because Taylor got sick that they just decided to say fuck it and give her a win. She deserves an Oscar for other works, but deserves garbage for this performance. It's not that great and deprives the others in this category of possible glory.

Greer Garson - Sunrise at Campobello

Wow, this is not what I expected from a Greer Garson performance. I know that she won the Oscar in this category for her role in Mrs. Miniver and I am excited to watch that film, but this performance just ain't it. I get that Garson is a respected actress but this is a totally awful performance that just misses on all accounts. Her choice to use that lilting accent that goes up and down as she speaks is horrendous. It makes no sense and sounds nothing like her and is just an odd choice. And that permeates the whole performance to where you can't really shake it and get over it. She looks nothing like Eleanor Roosevelt, which by the way I probably should have mentioned earlier, and just looks like Garson with fake teeth. The film itself is about Franklin Roosevelt's early years after he gets polio. Which the film can't say polio because of the production code, like what the fuck? God, I wish the Code never existed so we could have decades of films without that hindrance and maybe move Hollywood forward in the process. Anyway, the film only is good at the very end when we get to see the political maneuverings of picking a Presidential nominee which is fascinating and more media needs to be on that. Before that, the whole film is mostly filmed in rooms because it was based on a play so we get a ton of boring content of FDR in bed or at a desk. Garson is fine, whatever. She's really not great at all and something to overlook and wonder why she talks that way. A truly forgettable performance that should not have been nominated, not sure what the Academy was doing here.

Deborah Kerr - The Sundowners

Kerr (pronounced like Car, by the way, because I've been pronouncing it wrong for forever) has the distinction of most Best Actress nominations without a single win. This was her sixth and final nomination, though she would get an Honorary Oscar years later from the Academy. We will be getting very well acquainted with Kerr in the next decade so I was excited to see how she was in this film. I've seen her in a couple of her other nominated roles and just other films in general and she was always solid to great. That's no different here as she plays a wife and mother in a roving sheep herder family in the Australian Outback. One of those films where we follow a family through their trials and tribulations. Kerr is solid as expected and she really pairs well with Robert Mitchum who were good friends in real life and it shows. She plays the wife and mother role perfectly and is a sort of bedrock for the family and others they encounter like when she helps a woman give birth or encourages her husband to do a sheep shearing contest. She is supportive and caring and understanding, never really letting her frustrations of wanting to settle down get the best of her or her family. Kerr helps make this an entertaining film with a solid performance where she can play sexy, strong, lively, funny, and a hundred other adjectives. It's a good introduction to Kerr if you have never seen her on screen before. We will be getting to her more well known works in short time and I can't wait for that.

Shirley MacLaine - The Apartment

 

I always forget that MacLaine's lone Oscar win was for Terms of Endearment and not this film and it feels like she should have more than five acting nominations. I think that speaks to just how charming and talented an actor she is that I expect her to have many more. This is one of those films that people point to as being perfect or one of the best of all time and some of that is due to just how great MacLaine is in the role of Fran. She's so cute and charming but in a non purposeful way. She is just being herself and not some manic pixie dream girl and that's what attracts me most to the performance. It seems so effortless and she absorbs a lot of the attempts at flirting that the men in the film throw at her. She is unfazed at Jack Lemmon trying to take her out that it feels real. I love when the woman in a story is just nonplussed by whoever the lead of a film is that is trying to get in her pants or even just get her attention. It's better when the woman isn't some one dimensional piece of meat. MacLaine is certainly not that as her character has a range of emotional depth to mine. Without ruining the film, she has some dark moments and tough scenes to get through that she gives the seriousness they deserve. She can also have some great comedic moments and it's this balance that makes the performance so successful. I like that her character is not just being used and manipulated by the men in the film and she makes her own decisions for the most part. It's nice to see a well developed female character and that MacLaine can go toe to toe with anyone. It's just a really charming and effective performance from a really terrific film that everyone should see at least once.

Melina Mercouri - Never on Sunday

 

Another foreign actress getting a nomination, this was in the thick of the Academy rewarding actresses outside the norm. Mercouri is a Greek actress who won best performance at Cannes for this role, so it's not like it came out of nowhere. The film was well received by the Academy with five nominations, including Best Director and a win in Best Song (the first song from a foreign film to win). The film is a short one that essentially is a combination of Pygmalion and the hooker with a heart of gold trope. Mercouri is an independent prostitute who sets her own rules and enjoys her lifestyle. An American named Homer is trying to find himself and after seeing Mercouri, puppy dogs her everywhere. He actually comes off creepy at times just showing up in her room unannounced and following her everywhere. He doesn't like that she's a hooker and tries to change her into a more intelligent woman. Mercouri goes along with it for a bit and then is like nah, I like my old life way more. Mercouri is fine in the role although it didn't really wow me or anything. She is very fierce and independent and this take charge and take no shit kind of person. Mercouri leans into that mentality and runs with it to great effect. Definitely a pro woman type of film and it was interesting to watch. Mercouri does well with the role, but the performance just didn't stand out all that much to me. Worth watching for a very feminist type of film from the early 60s that feels a little fresher than being 60 years old.

What a fucking mess of a category, holy shit! At least two of these probably should not have been nominated at all. Taylor is a weak performance in a bad film that won because the Academy thought she was dying. So absurd! At least her second win was well deserved. Greer was just painful to watch. A boring film with a really awful performance from Greer. That just felt like the Academy rewarding someone they liked over liking the actual content. Mercouri was fine and it was a bit of an interesting film, but honestly if she wasn't nominated I'd be fine with that. Just not a big fan of the hooker roles, no matter who or what they are about because they are so overdone in this category. Kerr is solid and I am excited to watch more from her in the next decade. I guess I give my award to MacLaine who was pretty great in a wonderful little film. I feel she does a bit more than Kerr so she gets the win. What a terrible year to end the 60s on for this category. Really hoping to avoid disasters like these in the 50s, but we shall see.

Oscar Winner: Elizabeth Taylor - BUtterfield 8

My Winner: Shirley MacLaine - The Apartment

Deborah Kerr

Melina Mercouri

Elizabeth Taylor

Greer Garson

Supporting Actor 1960

Some really interesting names and films here that I can't wait to dive into, so let's get going!

1960 Best Supporting Actor

 

Peter Ustinov - Spartacus

 

I was never sure about Ustinov and his two wins because before this project, I had never really heard of him. I know that sounds ridiculous but I feel there are an increasing number of folks like me who just don't know his legacy. I am glad this project has not only shown me his two wins, but have shown me his work in other films as well. And because the Academy loves rewarding folks who have a great year, Ustinov wins here but also does great work in The Sundowners, where I laughed out loud at his character. I also have forgotten that this is a Stanley Kubrick film, but it makes sense because it looks so much better and so more stylish than the typical sword and sandal films of the previous decade. Ustinov plays Batiatus, a slave trader who buys Spartacus and trains him to be a gladiator along with others slaves. If you have ever seen an Ustinov performance, this one is very much like all the rest of his that I have seen. I don't say that in any negative way because I love his charming sort of deadpan and wry sense of humor. He is hilarious to me without it really being overt comic relief. For this performance he keeps it toned down but still brings a lot of humor, mostly by saying things to people who are above him in station and backtracking quickly to say something else. He's also kind of soft as a slave trader. Yes, he has moments where he can be a bit cruel, but he seems more motivated by money and pride than being a bad person who enjoys mistreating slaves. Ustinov follows the story around as he heads to Rome after the slaves overthrow his little camp and does more business with the Roman senators and he even escorts Jean Simmons and her baby out of harm's way (she is Spartacus's wife). He is very integral to the plot and always around at the right time and Ustinov perfectly plays his part in this very long film. It's really a great role for Ustinov and he makes the most of it and is my favorite part of this film.

Peter Falk - Murder, Inc

The introduction of Falk into Hollywood, this gave us Columbo so that's pretty good. You might also watch this film and think that this is a leading performance because they just can't get away from Falk in the story. I know another Best Actor blog said that Falk disappeared for a long time, but fuck no he didn't. He appeared intermittently but consistent enough to not be Supporting. It was his introducing credit, so that's why he is in Supporting, but Falk is very intimidating in the role. He is doing exactly what they want from him. Falk does a lot of killing, but then gets fucked over and taken to jail where he meets one of the people in this ridiculous film and offers advice. Falk plays everything as he should and is just a perfect gangster who accomplishes more than you do. So yeah, Falk is a gangster hitman and goes on doing his leader's bidding. The role is fine, but obviously Falk is doing way more than Supporting work here. It's again not a great film like his nomination from the next year and it feels like Falk was getting typecast. Glad he was able to breakaway from that and I know he was in some John Cassavetes films so he at least got to be more than just some boring gangster. A lightly decent performance where I'd suggest watching Falk's other work instead of this.

Jack Kruschen - The Apartment

This film is pretty damn great and it hurts me to say that Kruschen most likely just came along for the ride for such a well liked film. Kruschen plays the next door neighbor to Jack Lemmon and he provides a bit of comic relief as a Jewish doctor. He and his wife believe that Lemmon is a huge playboy who is having multiple women a week and throwing large parties and drinking like a fish and just being a huge party animal. Of course, these are the executives from his work that he lets use his apartment, but they don't know that and he never tells them otherwise. He has a few brief, funny interactions with Lemmon in the hall but does have a very serious scene. He is woken up by Lemmon to, spoiler alert, help tend to Shirley MacLaine who has overdosed on sleeping pills. The scene is fantastic because he does exactly what a doctor would do and it looks like the real thing. I read they had some emergency doctors on set guiding them on how Kruschen should act and it comes out making the scene so much better. So not a lot to the performance, just a guy who gets some laughs and then when he needs to be commanding and do his doctor duties hits it out of the park. Still, the nomination probably came with the film as amiable as Kruschen is in the role. I don't mind it, though, and would take more roles like this and less like Chill Wills.

Sal Mineo - Exodus

 

A very interesting film about the creation of Israel and all the troubles that came along with doing so. It's got a stacked cast including Paul Newman, Eva Marie Saint, Lee J. Cobb, Peter Lawford, Ralph Richardson, and of course Mineo among some others. It's also a very long film of almost three and a half hours, crazy that it was the third highest grossing films of 1960 at that length. Mineo plays Dov Landau, a young Jewish man who was in Auschwitz and wants to carve out a country for his fellow people by any means necessary. It's not a big role in terms of actual screen time, but Landau is instrumental in kicking off the aggression that eventually will lead to Israeli independence. I would say Mineo only has maybe twenty minutes face time and a lot of that is minor scenes setting up his romance with a young girl played by Jill Haworth, who I think should have been in the Supporting Actress category, honestly. Or it's him being arrested or visiting a group, minor scenes. But Mineo does have an Oscar scene where he is grilled by a group of radical Zionists about his time in Auschwitz and Mineo finally breaks down and admits he was a Jew that helped the Nazis blow up holes for mass graves. It's a good piece of acting that shows us that Mineo has the talent and is probably wasted a bit with his character getting so little to do in the film, though some of his scenes are pivotal ones. This was a role that Mineo desperately wanted and sought out and his persistence paid off with his second Oscar nomination. It gets better as the film goes on and that just made me want to see a little more of him in the role.

Chill Wills - The Alamo

 

Well, this is one of the more I guess infamously well known nominations if you follow Oscar history. Mostly because Wills unashamedly took out ads trying to win and stating in them that he was everyone's cousin and I love you all and that the cast and crew of this film were praying harder than the men who fought at the Alamo. Pretty unbelievable poor taste by Wills that drew the ire of his director and star of the film, John Wayne, among other stars at the time. Sammy Davis Jr. took out an ad saying sorry bruh, I voted for Sal Mineo (without the bruh, obviously). I don't know if this was the first real campaign for a win, but it sure was one of the most distasteful. Silly thing is, if you watch this film and have no idea who Wills is, you may not be able to guess who he is. He is nothing more than comedic relief and while he does succeed in that regard, it really is nothing special. He has a couple moments, but nothing that makes him standout and his nomination must be due to his campaign, because he certainly doesn't belong here. Maybe you could go with Richard Widmark or Laurence Harvey in their roles, but I don't think anyone would ever point to Wills willingly and say that should be nominated, let alone rewarded. This one is better left forgotten.

Definitely not the best group ever and probably a little disappointing if I'm being honest. Wills has a nothing role and only got nominated because he campaigned hard for it. Useless nomination that I would have rather gone to someone else. Falk is fine as a gangster and may be in the wrong category, but not an awful performance or anything. You can see the star power peeking through his work here, though. Kruschen probably just comes along for the ride but does have that one Oscar worthy scene where he goes into doctor mode. It is an important scene and a great bit of acting and I'm happy he's here. Mineo could have possibly been my winner if he had more screen time. He was also somewhat vital to the film but just didn't get a ton to do before he was used as a plot device. So Ustinov gets my vote because he is important to the film and pops up throughout this long film and gives a good performance to boot. Just a likable actor who does good work. Not a great year but at least some decent performances on the top end.

Oscar Winner: Peter Ustinov - Spartacus

My Winner: Peter Ustinov - Spartacus

Sal Mineo

Jack Kruschen

Peter Falk

Chill Wills

Supporting Actress 1960

A few films on this list I have been waiting a long time to finally watch. Also, some pretty recognizable names on here so hopefully this will be a pretty good group.

1960 Best Supporting Actress

 

Shirley Jones - Elmer Gantry

 

This performance was very much against type for Jones and is probably a contributing factor in her win. It also is one of those hooker with a heart of gold type of roles, albeit the heart of gold could be up for debate. But I actually really enjoyed this performance! When you look up the reviews on this performance, a lot of it is centered on Jones being a good girl in previous work going against type and mostly succeeding. I think she did a great job because she is just as morally ambiguous as Elmer Gantry (Burt Lancaster) is and it adds a bit to the theme of the film. Which the film is about Lancaster who is a grifter of sorts that latches onto preaching as a way to get what he wants. Jones is one of his old flames and she's a prostitute and recognizes him, so he has her cat house raided. She is convinced to blackmail him for lots of money by taking indecent pictures and does, but then reneges on accepting the payment because she still has feels. So here is this woman who is doing something maybe not morally great with selling herself and sees her ex-something swindling a community with religion and tries to expose him after he gets her house overrun with police. But she seems to feel a little guilty and doesn't take the money and it's just a great performance from Jones to go from cackling at his absurd scamming to wanting him to pay to oh, maybe I made a mistake. And I think that good girl persona served her well because she has this innocence to her but also this biting spitefulness, too. She also shows the past of Gantry and is important to establishing that he is a terrible fraud. Honestly really enjoyed this performance more than I thought I would and I think you will, too.

Glynis Johns - The Sundowners

Most people probably know Johns from her role as Winifred in Mary Poppins. A lot of that same energy is in this performance which was her only Oscar nomination of her career. Fun fact is that as of October 2022, she is the oldest living acting nominee still alive at 99 years young. Johns was a Tony award winner, a singer, and found most of her work as a character actress. In this film, Johns is a bartender down under and becomes friendly with a family of homesteaders and dates their helper, Peter Ustinov. I liked the film a lot because all of the characters are entertaining on different levels. Johns brings some comedic relief and a bit of a vivacious personality that livens up the film. She has these wide, bug eyes and a mouth that doesn't see to close because she either smiling ear to ear or constantly talking. She has fun interactions with Ustinov's character as he doesn't want to be tied down and is warm with the family she befriends. The role doesn't ask too much of her, but Johns does a good job with the performance that is as supporting as you can get without just being a cameo. A feisty little performance that fits the film and the role and gives you a good idea of who Johns is as an actress.

Shirley Knight - The Dark at the Top of the Stairs

There are times when I start a film and just can't get into it because it's been a long work day and I'm tired, got back from whatever and I'm tired, got drunk and decided to watch it and I'm tired, or started it and just couldn't give a fuck. The latter is this film, but also the former(s). Started this film so much to where I just want to finish it. It doesn't help that Knight doesn't show up until like 40 mins into this one. It's a film about, well, this young woman falls in love with a young Jewish boy from a neighboring boarding school while her parents go through marriage hell. It feels like Knight is lost in her feelings about her life and her new boyfriend and his issues with antisemitism. But she's playing a teenager in a melodrama and her role is more of an anxious, wispy girl who is overwhelmed not just by the subject, but by everyone else acting around her. It's the least interesting role in the film with Eve Arden as her caustic, bigoted aunt, Robert Preston chewing the scenery, Angela Lansbury giving a dignified performance. Even her boyfriend, little brother, and mother seem more interesting. This feels like the Academy trying to anoint a new starlet for whatever reason (young, pretty, blonde, member of the Actor Studio) since they also nominated her two years later for Sweet Bird of Youth. I think most people might say the wrong performance was nominated and not really the fault of Knight who does what she can with a flimsy role.

Janet Leigh - Psycho

 

How many people realize that this performance and this film was actually nominated for an Oscar? We have all seen the shower scene. We know the score. We probably all know the still of mother sitting in the window. I think it's easy to forget this is an Oscar nominated film and was really groundbreaking in what it brought to film. It's weird that both main actors, Leigh and Anthony Perkins, failed to be remembered for other instances in their career because both are so talented (how many know Perkins was nominated for a Supporting Actor Oscar before this?). I also think that people fail to remember that this film starts with Leigh stealing some money from her employer and then going on the run. She wasn't some weary, lost, innocent traveler needing a room. She had her own demons which adds to the overwhelming tension in the film. It's interesting what the collective public's mind will recall about actors or films. As for the performance, Leigh is anxious and that makes us anxious. Part of that building tension Hitchcock does so well. We are looking over our shoulder just like Leigh is and our faces are mirroring hers as she settles in at the Bates Hotel. She is great in closeup and she does a ton without actually saying much, which is a gift. The shower scene is iconic, but the rest of the performance is sort of a how to be a scared, paranoid woman on the run for every role that touched on those same themes. Leigh set the tone in iconic fashion so tons of other women could follow. Hell of a performance that we all kinda sorta remember.

Mary Ure - Sons and Lovers

 

This is a pretty interesting D. H. Lawrence film adaptation that deals with many different characters and their relationships and outlooks on life. Ure is like a factory supervisor who is also a very independent woman. She's an outspoken suffragette who believes in free love and is very self assured. She is the one character who knows who she is and what she wants. She helps guide the lead of the film Paul, played by Dean Stockwell, into trying to find who he is. They have a bit of a relationship, though he's not good in bed but does offer more than her husband does overall. She is the sensual, mature aspect of this film and almost a voice of reason. But we realize that she, too, has her own issues she is working through, she just knows that they are there and is working on them. Honestly, it's a great little performance from Ure because it gets us asking so many questions about Stockwell and her beliefs. I think coming at this from 2022 is probably a lot different than in 1960, where I feel this performance is a bit more salacious and captivating of a woman in charge of not only her own sexuality, but her own life as well. No one is dictating to her what she has to do or needs to do. And Ure plays this all a bit close to the vest and never really exposes herself and it makes for a really intriguing characterization. This is a performance that feels like it should or could be nothing more than a mistress realization but instead offers up much more thought and execution, thus delivering something much more worthwhile.

Not a bad group at all with some really interesting films. Knight is the obvious one out first and I honestly would rather replace her with Jill Haworth from Exodus who was pretty great in that film. Knight just gets overwhelmed in her film to where you'd rather nominate her co-stars instead of her. Johns is next because she was more of a glorified cameo, though very entertaining in her role. Just too small to reward here. Ure surprised me by being so modern of a performance that this probably hit harder back in 1960. A real solid performance that got me thinking. A shame that Ure didn't go own to have bigger roles. Jones went against type and had me liking her performance way more than I thought I would. Equally as morally ambiguous as her title character, it was solid work from Jones. Everyone knows Leigh's performance and it is partly iconic for a reason. Great performance that really sets the tone of the film and is an easy winner for me. A pretty decent group with some really interesting films, which is just how I like it.

Oscar Winner: Shirley Jones - Elmer Gantry

My Winner: Janet Leigh - Psycho

Shirley Jones 

Mary Ure

Glynis Johns

Shirley Knight