Best Actor 1960: Results

5. Trevor Howard in Sons and Lovers- I like that Trevor Howard tries to get something out of his fairly simplistic character, but he just is simply not given enough to do.

4. Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind- Tracy does a lot of big acting court room scenes, as well as believable mannerisms, he does both well, but not that well. And yes that's 9 losses to 0 wins for Tracy.

3. Jack Lemmon in The Apartment- Jack Lemmon is a charm, and humorous performance, that simply I enjoyable to watch, he creates a character and performance that is just great to follow through on his corporate misadventures.

2. Burt Lancaster in Elmer Gantry- Lancaster's performance is a terrific one because of his fascinating creation of Elmer Gantry. His wild energy is just perfect for the wild Gantry. Lancaster completely throws himself into his role creating a compelling character, with a fascinating combination of sarcasm, and earnestness.

1. Laurence Olivier in The Entertainer- I will admit this one really was pretty easy for me to choose. Olivier stood out for me as the best with his outstanding portrait of the on his last legs Vaudevillian Archie Rice. Olivier portrait of Rice's facades he puts on to hide the truth are perfectly handled by Olivier, and his moments where he shows the real honest Rice are incredible.

Deserving Performances:
Anthony Perkins in Psycho

Best Actor 1960: Burt Lancaster in Elmer Gantry

Burt Lancaster won his Oscar from his second nomination for portraying the titular role in Elmer Gantry.

Elmer Gantry has significantly grown on me on this viewing, and it certainly is interesting, and a much better film that Inherit the Wind which deals with some similar subject matter.

Lancaster has quite the challenge in this role, because the film, I believe, never portrays Gantry as either a good or a bad man entirely. Instead it more of simply portrays him, requiring what the audience thinks of him mostly to Lancaster himself. Lancaster as Gantry takes his wild man Lancaster approach rather than his straight man Lancaster approach, which works quite well for Elmer Gantry.

Gantry begins in the film as a complete rapscallion to say the least, a womanizing drinker, moving from town to town. Gantry wild man energetic performance works quite well for the fast moving Gantry, and he perfectly shows the unstable nature of Elmer. He shows the right amount of sheer fun in his performance that of course works as well as possibly for the joy seeking Gantry.

Gantry goes and joins up with a Evangelical religious group in an apparent lust after their leader Sister Sharon Falconer (Jean Simmons, who should have been nominated). Now what I do find fascinating is the film says very little about Gantry motives early on in these moments, but Lancaster is completely able to fully show without words what is going on in Elmer's head.

To get deeper in, and closer to Sharon, Gantry starts preaching as well right alongside here, bringing the fire and brimstone to the sermons. All of the sermon scenes really are incredible moments for Lancaster as Gantry. He is simply incredible and believable in his forceful preachings. Lancaster is terrific because he completely throws himself into the sermons both mentally, and physically. Each sermon by themselves are masterful moments by Lancaster.

The validity and truthfulness of Gantry and his organization is quickly questioned though, and he must defeat a critical journalist. Lancaster is terrific in this scene, as he slowly picks apart the writer, to bring him to Gantry's point. Lancaster makes Gantry ability to completely manipulate and control every problem that comes his way is completely convincing due to Lancaster quick concise manner.

What is most outstanding about Lancaster's performance though is his portrayal of the change or lack of change in Elmer Gantry. I would say he most definetly changes through how much is left a little to interpretation, which is so great about Lancaster's performance. He mostly internalizes this change through his performance, showing subtle changes  throughout the film, which is truly incredible. Lancaster creates the perfect portrait of Elmer Gantry, of both earnestness, and sarcasm, and the way they interweave, and over take one another. Overall Lancaster's performance is simply great, and frankly his preaching scenes alone made his Oscar deserved.

Best Actor 1960

And the Nominees:

Jack Lemmon in The Apartment

Laurence Olivier in The Entertainer

Burt Lancaster in Elmer Gantry

Trevor Howard in Sons and Lovers

Spencer Tracy in Inherit the Wind

Well it's Spencer Tracy's final chance, can he finally win, or is someone else the best?

Best Actor 1981: Results

5. Warren Beatty in Reds- Warren Beatty fails ever to do anything with John Reed, and never was believable for me. His performance is always underwhelming and never gets inside of his character.

4. Paul Newman in Absence of Malice- Newman is surprisingly dull in this movie. He just really seems to be going through the motions for the entire film save one scene which he is really good, but that is the only scene where he is not dull.

3. Burt Lancaster in Atlantic City- Lancaster gives a good energetic performance that works fairly well, unfortunately I felt his character a tad simple, and the films simply too poor for him to really excel.

2. Henry Fonda in On Golden Pond- Henry Fonda gives an incredibly memorable, humorous, and poignant performance that is worthy of being his final film performance.

1. Dudley Moore in Arthur-This was really a close one for me between Fonda, and Moore. I thought both excelled equally in their roles. Moore is terrific, he is charming, incredibly funny, and still finds time to bring a certain poignancy to the role. Overall simply a great performance.

Deserving Performances:Ben Cross in Chariots of Fire
Ian Charleson in Chariots of Fire

Best Actor 1981: Burt Lancaster in Atlantic City

Burt Lancaster received his fourth and final Oscar nomination for portraying small time crook Lou Pascal in Atlantic City.

Atlantic City is not much of a film in my view, it is poorly written poorly directed, and even poorly acted by some of the actors, although not all.

Burt Lancaster as Lou is in the more manic pool of Lancaster performances. I find he generally has too very distinct styles to roles, either the at least slightly wacky crazy man like in this film, and Elmer Gantry, or his more  stiff spined style as in Birdman of Alcatraz and From Here Eternity. The wacky characterization is perhaps the trickier of the the two, because it can perhaps be gold, or absolute obnoxiousness as he is in some of his performances. Here I feel it turns out to be neither of these two extremes, but rather in the middle although leaning pretty far away from obnoxiousness.

Lancaster does have the right about of energy in his performance, and lightens up the movie a little bit when he can, but he simply can not get past the script. The script leaves Lou, fairly simplistic in nature. A old always small time criminal, who would like to be remembered as a big timer. I felt there was very little to him more than that. Lancaster gives the part a nice dignity to it, but he does not make more out of the character because I do not really think he could due to the script itself. He works well enough with Susan Sarandon, and their affair is not unbelievable because Lancaster certainly is charming in the role, but unfortunately there is nothing special about the relationship besides the age difference once again due to the script.

Lancaster never becomes completely boring in this movie that to me was rather boring. I found he could still be followed through the pointless plot of the drug story, and like a true star does remain watchable. I think his highlight too is his joyful reaction to sort of making it in the big time. After killing the two thugs which is widely reported his constant bragging is made interesting and entertaining as Lou finally has his dream sort of come true. Still though the character arc basically only consists of making it big so to speak, and nothing much else. The character is simply too underdeveloped for Lancaster to really excel in the role. I will say he is good though, the second best thing in the film behind Sarandon's performance, and if the film itself had been better Lancaster could very well could have given a great performance rather just a good one.

Best Actor 1981

And the Nominees Were:

Dudley Moore in Arthur

Warren Beatty in Reds

Henry Fonda in On Golden Pond

Paul Newman in Absence of Malice 

Burt Lancaster in Atlantic City

Who do you pick and predict?

Best Actor 1962: Results

5. Burt Lancaster in Birdman of Alcatraz- Burt Lancaster does his best despite Robert Stroud being an incredibly oddly written character. Lancaster does succeed as much as he can with his material, and does show his charisma and star quality almost throughout the film.

4. Marcello Mastroianni in Divorce Italian Style- Mastroianni is downright hilarious, and creates a brilliant performance of deadpan brilliance. His performance is simple at times by always appropriately so, and always to maximize the hilarity of his performance.

3. Gregory Peck in To Kill A Mockingbird- Gregory Peck gives an especially effective and just about perfect performance as Atticus Finch. He is especially brilliant in his creation of Atticus which is absolutely magnificent. He also adds the right heart in his scenes with the children, and the right power and passion especially in his final speech at the trial.

2. Jack Lemmon in Days of Wine and Roses- Lemmon gives a brilliant and searing performance. Lemmon excels in all of his scenes, first carefully suggesting his alcoholism early on, but later having truly chilling moments involving his most troubled moments of alcoholism. A truly brilliant performance that is sometimes hard to watch simply because he is so good.

1. Peter O'Toole in Lawrence of Arabia- Peter O'Toole gives a performance of true greatness as Lawrence. He not only holds interest throughout his long running film, but he also shows an incredible unique portrait of a fascinating man. His transition of all forms are brilliantly shown, and he gives a performance of utter brilliance. O'Toole is absolutely perfect in every moment of his incredible performance, that I think is one of the greatest, and certainly O'Toole's best.

Deserving Performances:
James Mason in Lolita

Best Actor 1962: Burt Lancaster in Birdman of Alcatraz

Burt Lancaster received his third Oscar nomination for portraying prisoner Robert Stroud in Birdman of Alcatraz.

Birdman of Alcatraz is a problematic film for a few reasons. The most obvious is the real Robert Stroud. The film wants to show prison as problematic and hindering great minds, and that even changes are only for conformity. This might have worked if Stroud was not reportedly a psychopath in real life, therefore trying to make him look like a great hero is just wrong. The other problem was I did not even sympathize with the sanitized version of Stroud, because there was one thing they did not change and that was his two murders. The film does not show the first but the second instantly made me not be able sympathize with him. Sure the guard was a bit of a jerk, but Stroud certainly had no right to kill him. That in itself makes the film fail in its point, they should have instead used the bird loving ideas, and fictionalized the rest including the main character in name and personality because Robert Stroud seemed to honestly be an a very bad person. All in all I still did enjoy watching the film to a degree and after 1991 I really see that older most of the time are better even when deeply flawed.

The portrait of Stroud early on actually hinders Lancaster's performance. Stroud early on is shown to belligerent and some what psychopathic. He acts angry to the Warden who really is at first just doing his job, and he acts psychotically to other inmates over his mother despite the other inmates only very passively asking about her. Still Lancaster is properly effective in showing the defiant and somewhat psychotic Stroud. He shows the appropriate inner anger to the man, and possibly hinting at his psychotic, and mother's boy nature intertwined quite well. The only problem with this is this portion of the character and Lancaster's performance is completely forgotten about for the rest of the film. Once his sentence for killing a guard is changed to life sentence the film and Lancaster completely change the portrayal of Stroud suddenly. It is not really Lancaster's fault that is characterization is not consist it is the direction and script which makes him change so quickly and not even allowing him time for a character transition period.

After this initial scene Stroud is shown to be a fairly pleasant man who dislikes the prison system, but plays by its rules mostly. He calmly spends his time in his cell. I will admit there is a slight hint of the earlier portrayal but not much of one. Early Lancaster acts as a bit of a jerk demanding everything from his friendly guard without ever thinking of common curtsy. He gets over this flaw too to become almost a perfect man by finally thanking the guard. Lancaster acts his slight jerky nature well, enough but after that short part Lancaster finally settle as Stroud, as just a decent man who tries to live a life while calmly fighting the conforming prison system. I think Lancaster does well despite how simple his character ends up becoming. I did certainly find him always watchable, and certainly knew how to command the screen even when he was just washing a bird cage or building one. Somehow despite doing so little in these scenes where he takes care of birds Lancaster stays watchable, which obviously shows how and why he was such a star.

Still the film presents more problems for Lancaster due to the strangeness of some of its plot elements. For example Stroud marries a woman who he started a bird business with. They get married in attempt so he can stay where he is with his birds. There scenes at first are brief, and unromantic including when he proposes to her. But later in the film it their last scene together it is implied they actually loved each other which was not earned by the film. Lancaster does try to make this and all of the other elements tossed together in Stroud's character. Lancaster does a fine job despite the poor writing of Stroud, which really is some sort of achievement. The writing though stops him from giving a great performance. His best scenes are his scenes of the agreed Stroud. Lancaster subtle shows a man who now has come to treasure life, and the idea of freedom. He both obviously states this with the proper passion but also shows it carefully in his eyes and his face. Overall Lancaster does always remain watchable, and gives an honest performance at the end. The film never helps him but he still gives a good performance.

Best Actor 1962

And the Nominees Were:

Peter O'Toole in Lawrence of Arabia

Jack Lemmon in Days of Wine and Roses

Gregory Peck in To Kill a Mockingbird

Marcello Mastroianni in Divorce, Italian Style

Burt Lancaster in Birdman of Alcatraz  

Who do you predict, who do you pick?