Best Actor 1975: Results

5. James Whitmore in Give 'Em Hell Harry!- This simple truth about this performance is it should not have been nominated. This is not a performance for film, it was performed for an audience in the theater not for the the person watching the film. This abundantly clear throughout the film in his theatrical performance, that is completely unrelenting, and is rather awkward to watch.

4. Walter Matthau in The Sunshine Boys- Matthau performance is not all that funny to me in most of his scenes. In most scenes I found him rather annoying, but he makes up for it somewhat due to every scene with George Burns, because their scenes are wonderful.

3. Maximilian Schell in A Man in the Glass Booth- Schell whole performance really is nuts, but a glorious nuts. He is incredibly entertaining in his insanity, as well as does his very best to manage the concepts of his character.

2. Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoos Nest- Nicholson excels in every single moment of his performance here. It is a perfect role for Nicholson, and Nicholson knows. He gives an entertaining magnetic performance, that works wonders for his film.

1. Al Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon- As great as Nicholson is there is no doubt in my mind that Pacino gives the best performance this year. Pacino simply makes so many risks with this performance from his manic ways, to his voice he uses, to the extreme emotional range found in Sonny, and the thing is they all pay off completely, this is truly a perfect performance. There is not a false or boring moment, only powerful, effective, entertaining, and fascinating ones in this stunning portrait of a man.

Deserving Performances:
Michael Caine in The Man Who Would be King
Sean Connery in The Man Who Would be King

Best Actor 1975: Maximilian Schell in The Man in a Glass Booth

Maximilian Schell received his second Oscar nomination for portraying Arthur Goldman in The Man in the Glass Booth.

The Man in the Glass Booth is an odd film, although certianly intriguing about rich Jewish Businessman who is arrested and abducted by Israel to stand trial as a Nazi, but who is he the Jew or the Nazi.

Maximilian Schell's performance is a performance I think is best described as completely insane. Also this will be a spoiler filled review since it is rather difficult to talk about this performance without going from beginning to end with it. An insane man though who has quite the ability, and reasoning to his insane plan that he implement in this film, a plan he implements that is quite strange, and the reason for is left to interpretation by the film, although apparently the play this was based on.

Schell begins the film as a rich Jewish businessman, he is the type of cynical, but successful man who may have a severe case of survivors guilt or maybe he doesn't. Either way though Arthur Goldman is a rather strange, and flamboyant fellow, who may be paranoid, and insane, but maybe he is not. Schell really has a challenge to dealing with the mystery and as well as contradiction of the character of Arthur Goldman.

I really do not know who Goldman is at the beginning, I felt he was a bit like Rod Steiger in the Pawnbroker for the most part. Schell indeed does a interesting job of suggesting more than just a cynical Jewish man, but as well excels as the cynical man, who seems most interested in his own intelligence and ability, with his constant control, sway, and his distinct manner he interacts with everyone around him.

What about Goldman though, why does he seem to have more such as kicking his own foot in on a statue, and burning himself with a candle, or suspecting that people are after him. Why is he doing all this, well there is more to him than just being cynical. What is it, I still do not know exactly, but Schell certainly suggests something quite well, with still keeping the right mystery about his character.

Goldman is eventually captured by the Israelis. He is revealed to be former concentration camp commandant Dorf, or is he? well more on that later. He certainly says he is Dorf, and says he is most certainly a Nazi who killed thousands and loved doing it. Maximilian Schell was already pretty insane in the role, now he goes totally nuts in the role, when he becomes Dorf.

Dorf loves being a Nazi, and being evil apparently, since Schell plays him with almost too much gusto. A guy who is supposedly guilty of such crimes should not be as entertaining as Schell is when he goes nuts. In his trial Schell holds every moment every scene with his mad man approach, which is hard not to watch.

Schell suggests that Dorf is pure evil, and saw nothing wrong with what he had done. He still suggests though that he is hiding something since where he is questioned if he actually is Jewish he foes completely vicious, in trying to say he is not Jewish because how could he be since he killed so many Jewish people without mercy.

Well soon enough the truth is revealed, well I guess it is the truth, he really is not Dorf, he is Goldman after all, and wanted to be believed as Dorf, why, well it is hard to tell exactly why perhaps it was because he was driven insane by the real Dorf, perhaps it is his survivors guilt, or maybe something else entirely. Schell allows all options to be possible, in fact he suggests maybe it it many of the reasons combined.

Schell performance is over the top sure, but that does work incredibly well, and Schell suggests that that was Goldman's way of showing how insane the Nazis were. Also Goldman clearly was insane, and perhaps he never could never face reality again after his experiences Schell also seems to say with his final chilling scene, where perhaps Goldman finally does see everything for what it is, and can no longer hide himself.

Schell's performance is one that it is hard to judge it is such as scatter shot, completely off the wall approach, but I found his completely insane off the wall approach actually did work for the part. I really think this is a part that could have extremely easily been completely wrong, but Schell manages through his insanity to make this one intriguing character. This is hardly a perfect performance, but I think no actor could really find a way to play this odd a character perfectly, Schell instead probably handles this character as well as one could possibly handle him.

Best Actor 1975

And the Nominees Were:

Al Pacino in Dog Day Afternoon

James Whitmore in Give 'Em Hell, Harry!

Jack Nicholson in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest

Maximilian Schell in The Man in the Glass Booth

Walter Matthau in The Sunshine Boys 

Best Actor 1961: Results

5. Charles Boyer in Fanny- Boyer is fine enough but his role is too small and simple for his to accomplish all that much.

4. Spencer Tracy in Judgment At Nuremberg- Tracy is functionally fine in the part, but fails to really find any real depth in his underwritten part.

3. Maximilian Schell in Judgment At Nuremberg- Schell's performance is ACTING most certianly, he does not have too much of a character, but he is an energetic and effective presence in the film.

2. Paul Newman in The Hustler- An absolutely terrific performance, where Newman really creates a fascinating original character in Fast Eddie Felson. Newman never goes the easy way with his character, always going for instead a complex and creative character.

1. Stuart Whitman in The Mark- This one was extremely close for me, and much harder to choose than I expected it to be, before I watched the Mark. Whitman though completely threw me off with his extremely powerful complex performance of a deeply troubled man trying to change his life. I will say I do not think Whitman is better Newman, they are both equally great, but the nature of the award is choosing one, and for the moment I will choose Whitman. This is a year though where I am sure my choice could easily go back forth, because both create such memorable and powerful portraits of two incredibly unique characters.

Deserving Performances:
Open to Suggestions.

Best Actor 1961: Maximilian Schell in Judgment At Nuremberg

Maximilian Schell won an Oscar from his first nomination for portraying defense lawyer Hans Rolfe in Judgment At Nuremberg.

This seems a bit of a strange win in that Schell was only in a few films before his win here, and was hardly really a well known actor at the time. It seems even odder that he defeated his veteran actor co-star Spencer Tracy. Also his role of Hans Rolfe is a firmly supporting one, and not the actual lead which is Spencer Tracy. Now perhaps his win is not that odd though just look at the acting winners, the academy that year had no interest in rewarding veterans even long overdue ones like Montgomery Clift for this film in the Supporting Actor category for this same film, and they really just wanted to award newcomers, since all winners were first time nominees.

Another reason though that helped him win is although his role is supporting, it is a very showy performance with still a good amount of screen time. Hans Rolfe is a very passionate lawyer who fights to find the accused judge Ernest Janning (Burt Lancaster) innocent on the charges of crimes committed against humanity due his work for the Nazis. Rolfe basis his case that they were just acting within the law of their country, therefore did not do something technically wrong.

Rolfe to illustrate his points make many passionate speeches before the court. Schell excels in all these moments and does realize the want for German respect for Rolfe very well. His speeches are thrilling because Schell infuses them with great command and energy. Schell is very charismatic in his performance and does control the screen whenever he is speaking. It could be easy for the viewer to shrug off all of his points that make excuses for horrendous crimes of the Nazis, but Schell does avoid this because he just simply states Rolfe's views exceedingly well.

Now does that mean I was convinced by his points, no, but Schell performance allows for a thoughtful discussion because of his earnest portrayal as Rolfe. Now Rolfe has many scenes where he must show how someone was "justly" convicted because they did fit into guilt of Nazi laws. If these scenes he breaks apart the witnesses of the Nazis, or victims of them. Schell is exceptional again , in his cold demeanor, and it is realistic in his calculative method of finding what he wants. Now although Schell is terrific in these moments, I must say they are a bit of plot contrivance because frankly do not believe the Tribunal would let them go on, especially in the scene where Rolfe verbally attack the victim played by Judy Garland, badgering the witness anyone? I mention this though because if Schell was not nearly as strong they could have been terrible frankly, but I still will say even with Schell they are not entirely believable.

Schell performance has a lot of yelling, which I will say does fit for Rolfe, because he has to get his point across, but it is mostly an external performance. The viewer actually only finds out a little of who Hans Rolfe really is. Now much what is written about this character today calls him a Nazi lawyer. That could be correct by the way he treats Montgomery Clift's and Garland's characters but from the other little mentioned about him is that he just is young German lawyer who wants to savor a little respect for his people.

It is hard to say Schell is given few scenes that show the true nature of his character. He is given total three scenes outside the courtroom. Two he speaks to Lancaster's character and shows his respect for him, and claims he did not like doing what he had to do in the courtroom. Schell is given little dialogue, and I really find he more of suggests with this for the German respect side of this character's interpretation. I think one other scene actually in court further supports this side, and that is his face when he must react to the concentration camp footage. Schell does show quite well show that Rolfe really was very emotionally effected by the footage. I think does more of support him as just the young lawyer seeking for some respect. This should be mentioned because Schell is able to suggest this aspect of his character with little to no material.

Overall Schell gives a good strong performance, that effectively makes the courtroom scenes interesting and far more effective than they probably would have been without him. Still though his role is a little too limited, and much of his performance is repetitive, articulate effective repetition, but repetition nonetheless. That is fine though since it is a supporting performance, and his character does not  need to be anything more than it is. As is his performance is a strong supporting performance, probably the second strongest in the film, but still his performance always remains for me quite good instead of quite great.

Best Actor 1961

And the Nominees Were:

Paul Newman in The Hustler

Stuart Whitman in The Mark

Maximilian Schell in Judgment At Nuremberg

Spencer Tracy in Judgment At Nuremberg

Charles Boyer in Fanny

 Well here it is the most requested year. I frankly do not know how almost everyone was so interested in this year exactly, but I guess I'll see how it is.