Best Supporting Actor 1952: Results

5. Richard Burton in My Cousin Rachel- Although I thought his performance was effective, but I think part of why this was because of a clear inexperience in his acting that happened to work well for his inexperienced character. That is the only real reason he is at the bottom of my list.

4. Arthur Hunnicutt in The Big Sky- Hunnicutt places fourth mostly because had had the least emotional reaction to his performance out of the nominees. He still was very good, and manged to turn a stock role into a warm and effective performance.

3. Jack Palance in Sudden Fear- An effective performance by Palance which requires him to be both charming, and deceitful. His performance is required for the believability of the film, and since he succeeds he enables the film to actually be realistic for a thriller of course.

2. Anthony Quinn in Viva Zapata!- Quinn brings much needed realism and authenticity to his role, and the film he is in. He gives an effective performance throughout, and although I did think his conclusive was completely earned in terms of the film's structure I thought his performance in that scene was indeed terrific.

1. Victor McLaglen in The Quiet Man- Topping what is indeed a strong year of supporting actors is Victor McLaglen. I will say this was not easy at all to decide my choice unlike so many a supporting year. I really had a tough choice this year, Palance perhaps had the biggest challenge, Quinn the most realistic perhaps, but McLaglen for me was the most enjoyable. I think he gives an amusing performance. Yes it is over the top in ways, but in a manner completely fitting of his character. A close call, but I will just with the one I enjoy watching the most.

Deserving Performances:
Barry Fitzgerald in The Quiet Man
Stanley Holloway in The Lavender Hill Mob

Best Supporting Actor 1952: Jack Palance in Sudden Fear

Jack Palance received his first Oscar nomination for portraying Lester Blaine in Sudden Fear.

I should say this is a spoiler review since it is needed to really properly describe the performance of Palance. Sudden Fear is an effective thriller about a playwright Myra Hudson (Joan Crawford) who begins to suspect her new husband Lester might have some ill intents for her. It is a good thriller although there is a plot hole in that she never calls the police, but hey in a modern thriller she likely would and it would lead to either the scene with the cops are useless and believe she's just crazy, or the cop would walk in and quickly be killed, but this is a low body count thriller like all older thrillers, and much more effective because of that reason.

Lester Blaine first crosses paths with Myra when she refuses to cast him in her play because he lacks stage presence. Anyways he meets her later, and charms her off her feet basically. This is quite a challenge that Palance must fulfill to make this romance believable. Palance though is actually charming enough in these early scenes to make this aspect of the film believable. He is not charming in say a Clark Gable sense, or more appropriately a Robert Montgomery in Night Must Fall sense, but really an average Joe charm that works well.

Palance is also quite commanding in the beginning of the film. His control he takes over Crawford is made quite believable by both actors. This command is necessary to make the actions of Crawford's character believable suggesting as giving him a great place in her will. I will say Palance does make his control over her properly realistic. I almost felt he was the male lead because of the first half of the film. In the second half of the film though his role does become limiting quite considerably, when the film does almost completely focus on Joan Crawford's character.

Palance though suggests that underneath his charm there is a selfish motive underneath all what he is doing. It turns out that he actually only romanced and married Myra to get her fortune. He intends to, along with his ex-girlfriend Irene Neves. I think Palance did a fairly good job at the beginning of the film hiding Lester's true attentions, but nonetheless subtlety suggesting them at the same time. His revelation is well handled, his whole facade is very believable, and I think he did not make his evil intentions completely obvious at the beginning of the film making it more effective when he did.

Palance at the end of the film is properly chilling when he finally undergoes his plan of action. I liked it that he did not turn Lester into a complete psychopath precisely, but clearly a man who is a bit nervous himself. I liked at the end that he really goes over the edge, and becomes incredibly nervous and frantic at the end in his attempt to fulfill his plan and not get caught. Overall a strong effective performance from Jack Palance.

Best Supporting Actor 1952

And the Nominees Were:

Victor McLaglen in The Quiet Man

Jack Palance in Sudden Fear

Anthony Quinn in Viva Zapata!

Arthur Hunnicutt in The Big Sky

Richard Burton in My Cousin Rachel

Best Supporting Actor 1953: Results

5. Frank Sinatra in From Here To Eternity- Frank Sinatra is only ever obnoxious as Angelo Maggio. He is just annoying in most of the early scenes than in his final scenes he overacts massively.

4. Eddie Albert in Roman Holiday- Albert technically does nothing wrong in his role, and does not take away from the film, but he basically is always just in the background taking pictures that is all.

3. Brandon De Wilde in Shane- Brandon De Wilde is a dull presence in the film, and every single line and reactions only take away from the film. He is suppose to be the heart in the film but fails miserably to ever be authentic.

2. Jack Palance in Shane- The role he plays it not much but Palance puts the right amount of menace in his role as the villainous gunman. He is never required to all that much but everything he does do is as well handled as possible.

1. Robert Strauss in Stalag 17- The winner of this incredibly weak year is Robert Strauss as Animal. He is funny enough as the two man Pow comedy team, and he does not let his jokes actually interfere with more serious sections of the film, since he does not overplay his role. Now this is not much but it is the most in this year. Really in the end I would probably say if anyone of them won it would have felt a little undeserved since none of them really should have been nominated.

Deserving Performances:Otto Preminger in Stalag 17
Ernest Borgnine in From Here to Eternity
John Gielgud in Julius Caesar
Jay Robinson in The Robe

Best Supporting Actor 1953: Jack Palance in Shane

Jack Palance received his second Oscar nomination for portraying hired gunslinger Jack Wilson in Shane.

Palance  shows up about half way into the film as a villainous gunslinger hired by a cattle baron Rufus Ryker to insure that the homesteaders leave once and for all. Palance does basically one thing in this film, but he does that one things very well, and that is looking menacingly. He is always walking with perfect posture, his hands always ready to shoot even when his hands are around a glass of alcohol. He also has a very grim face and a small smile indicating Wilson's enjoyment of killing men who are slower at the draw. I'll give credit to Palance he is a good a villain here being menacing in the right way, and adds the right amount of dread to the film. He is most evil in his performance when he shoots a hot headed homesteader, having the right pompousness with his menace, and his last scene with Shane, where his reaction to Shane's insult is perfect. Not a great performance, Wilson really is not that much of a character, but Palance really does everything he can with the role. He is not the greatest villain ever but Palance makes Wilson into at least a somewhat memorable one.

Best Supporting Actor 1953

And the Nominees Were:

Jack Palance in Shane

Brandon De Wilde in Shane

Frank Sinatra in From Here to Eternity

Eddie Albert in Roman Holiday

Robert Strauss in Stalag 17

Who do you pick? What do you predict my ranking will be?