All of that may be true, but I seriously doubt that the majority of voters thought his performance in Blood Diamond was better than his performance in The Departed.
If we could see the actual numbers, I suspect it would look like his mentions for The Departed were split something like 60/40 for lead and although he got fewer mentions for Blood Diamond his votes for lead in that totaled more than his votes for The Departed in lead.
I suppose the Academy could go down the list of eligible films and name the actors in each film that should be considered lead and say everyone else in the film is supporting but they've been there and done that. People were unhappy about it at least from the time Fox submitted the entire cast of Cleopatra as lead shutting out Roddy McDowall from a likely Best Supporting Actor nomination in 1963 to Trevor Howard being submitted as lead for Ryan's Daughter shutting him out of an almost certain Supporting Actor nomination.
Maybe they should ban listing actors as lead and supporting in "for your consideration" ads and just list the actors whose performances they think should be considered, or better yet just say for your consideration in all categories as some already do.
Big Magilla wrote
I doubt it would solve anything. Actors, with their big egos, would have a fit.
DiCaprio was submitted for supporting actor for The Departed, which was ridiculous on the face of it, but voters had the option of ignoring the "for your consideration" ads and nominating him for that instead of for Blood Diamond, although I suppose it's possible that he could have gotten votes for both Best Actor and Supporting Actor for that without either being enough to nominate him for it. That didn't stop them, though, for doing exactly that for his Titanic co-star two years later and giving her the win to boot.
If there was some type of outside arbitration for what constitutes leading/supporting, DiCaprio wouldn't have any say in it. Maybe it results in Blood Diamond getting pushed back to 2007 so he can get a nomination or win then. But either way, it stands to reason that DiCaprio split the vote with himself in some capacity considering that in almost every other instance where he could be nominated for The Departed, he was. He was only eligible for supporting at the Screen Actor's Guild, and he got nominated. He was nominated twice at the Golden Globes. He was nominated solely for The Departed at the BAFTAs. It's possible he was the fourth or fifth highest vote getting with the Academy for Best Actor but just fell behind his Blood Diamond performance.
Sabin wrote:As we go through this year, I realized something potentially interesting: if we are talking about a world where the actors have to be submitted for one appropriate category and that's it, would Leonardo DiCaprio have been nominated for Best Actor for The Departed after all? There wouldn't be as much confusion about which role he should be nominated for and in which category.
Just a thought.
I doubt it would solve anything. Actors, with their big egos, would have a fit.
DiCaprio was submitted for supporting actor for The Departed, which was ridiculous on the face of it, but voters had the option of ignoring the "for your consideration" ads and nominating him for that instead of for Blood Diamond, although I suppose it's possible that he could have gotten votes for both Best Actor and Supporting Actor for that without either being enough to nominate him for it. That didn't stop them, though, for doing exactly that for his Titanic co-star two years later and giving her the win to boot.
As we go through this year, I realized something potentially interesting: if we are talking about a world where the actors have to be submitted for one appropriate category and that's it, would Leonardo DiCaprio have been nominated for Best Actor for The Departed after all? There wouldn't be as much confusion about which role he should be nominated for and in which category.
Big Magilla wrote
Either Blanchett or Hudson could have switched with Streep to be nominated in lead, but if both were so nominated, then Penelope Cruz in her greatest performance would have been the one most likely locked out of Best Actress which everyone knew would be going to Helen Mirren anyway. Streep's nomination, like Whitaker's, was not at the expense of her co-star (Anne Hathaway) who no one would have nominated anyway. A nomination for Strep in support could've been at the expense of Emily Blunt who was widely expected to be nominated in support for Prada but shamefully wasn't.
I don't remember Blunt being widely predicted for a nomination. I remember the lineup being widely-agreed upon to be Barazza, Blanchett, Breslin, Hudson, and Kikuchi. Not to say she wasn't deserving.
The best argument I can think of for Meryl Streep being a lead is that there are so many more clearly supporting roles in The Devil Wears Prada.
Little Miss Sunshine was an ensemble piece in which all the actors should have been considered supporting. They supported one another. Collette's was the second-best performance in the film after Breslin, but she was not dominant the way Gregory Peck was in both The Yearling and To Kill a Mockingbird.
The interesting thing about Whitaker is that no one at the time thought his was a supporting performance. If anything, he was considered a co-lead with James McAvoy who no one nominated.
Either Blanchett or Hudson could have switched with Streep to be nominated in lead, but if both were so nominated, then Penelope Cruz in her greatest performance would have been the one most likely locked out of Best Actress which everyone knew would be going to Helen Mirren anyway. Streep's nomination, like Whitaker's, was not at the expense of her co-star (Anne Hathaway) who no one would have nominated anyway. A nomination for Strep in support could've been at the expense of Emily Blunt who was widely expected to be nominated in support for Prada but shamefully wasn't.
dws1982 wrote
I know some people make a case for Abigail Breslin as Lead, but that's not one I would make a big case out of. I think that, other than Arkin, you could make a case for everyone else in that movie as Lead or Support.
I didn't think about that. I won't be editing this post but later on I'm going to write something about how in family stories there's a tendency to nominate the parents in the lead categories and the children in supporting categories by default. I see that Toni Collette was nominated for a lead Golden Globe for Little Miss Sunshine. She doesn't not feel like a lead to me.
The more I think about it, the only person I'm comfortable calling lead in Little Miss Sunshine is Abigail Breslin. She's a character who never really needs a shoulder to cry on. She knows what she's going to do from minute one. I'm inclined to think that Greg Kinnear is probably the co-lead over Paul Dano and Steve Carell because he is the dominant driver of the physical journey, and neither Dano or Carell really lend Breslin the emotional support that Alan Arkin does.
Lead:
Djimon Hounsou
Jennifer Hudson
Cate Blanchett
Support:
Whitaker
Streep
I think Whitaker and Streep are both borderline cases. McAvoy and Hathaway are both those "invisible" type leads that never get nominated and give way to a flashier performer. Whitaker really has a lot less screen time than McAvoy, and I don't think the movie ever really affords Whitaker much point-of-view. So I would put him in Support. Same argument would apply for Streep, who has even less screen time, relatively speaking, than Whitaker.
I don't think any of the supporting nominees are borderline cases. Blanchett is in over half of the film, and while someone with over 55% screen time could be support, Blanchett sure isn't. Hudson has the same amount of screen time as Beyonce, and the first half of the film is very much focused on Effie. The second half is less focused on her, but it returns to her plenty. Don't remember a great deal about Blood Diamond, but I remember thinking in the past that this is one of those cases that Uri would bring up where things like race and social status of the character play into category placement. I saw Hounsou and DiCaprio as co-leads, but I probably should see it again.
I know some people make a case for Abigail Breslin as Lead, but that's not one I would make a big case out of. I think that, other than Arkin, you could make a case for everyone else in that movie as Lead or Support.
I'm suffering through the flu, so no long response.
Hounsou is clearly support. Streep and Whitaker were clearly supporting players in their films, but they went for lead giving other actors a chance in support. Hudson and Blanchett were co-leads in theirs, but I have no problem with either in support, Hudson because that's the only category she could have won in, and Blanchett because this is the first time I voted or her to win one of my awards.
Reaching across the categories here, even including a few winners.
Forest Whitaker's Oscar win for The Last King of Scotland really caught me by surprising. I don't know who I thought was going to sail to victory (probably Peter O'Toole) but I don't think anybody predict in November of 2006 that every single precursor would lineup behind Whitaker, to say nothing of the quality of his performance. It just wasn't an especially well-regarded film. It's nice to see a reliable character actor like Whitaker get his due though. But could a case be made that Whitaker is supporting? James McAvoy's character is clearly the protagonist. Forest Whitaker's Idi Amin is more the world of the film that the protagonist enters into. Everything about the world feels like an extension of Whitaker's Idi Amin, even when he is not on-screen. For reference, he is only on-screen for 34.63% of the running time.
In strict terms, I think he could be considered supporting but it's such a forceful performance that I think it warrants lead status.
I would pose a similar question for Meryl Streep in The Devil Wears Prada, a quite good film and performance that I like more and more with every passing year. Anne Hathaway is clearly the protagonist of the story and she gets sucked into the world of fashion, some of which involves Meryl Streep's character but not all of it. If anyone else had played Idi Amin, I think it would still constitute a leading performance in The Last King of Scotland, but it took Meryl Streep's movie stardom to elevate Miranda Priestly to lead status (although the National Society of Film Critics honored her in support). She is only on-screen for 26.22% of the running time, slightly less than her Adaptation. performance. She's playing the boss from hell who slowly reveals unexpected layers, but always from Hathaway's point of view. And here the question of movie star magic takes over. Streep has such an unforgettable entrance in the film (it made up the entire trailer) that it's hard to think of anything else from the film afterwards, although it has two terrific supporting turns by Emily Blunt and Stanley Tucci. To which I raise the question, because there are other clearer supporting performances in The Devil Wears Prada, does that elevate Streep to lead?
I think so. I'd be interested in others points of view. I'm least confident about this one. I'm going to let others weigh in.
It's been a while since I've seen Dreamgirls but Jennifer Hudson always made more sense as a lead performance. I certainly remember it as the story of Deena and Effie primarily. That's how they were recognized at the Tony's. And yet I see no nominations for Jennifer Hudson for Best Actress anywhere. I see that she was only on-screen for 39.60% of the running-time. I'd be interested in everyone else's thoughts but there are just so many other clearer supporting performances in Dreamgirls and Hudson's impact is so big, especially contrasted to Beyoncé Knowles and Jamie Foxx, both of whom are perfectly fine in their role but a bit lacking in depth. If one of the Dreamgirls is supporting, wouldn't it be Anika Noni Rose?
I'm voting to elevate Jennifer Hudson to lead and I think she would have ended up with a nomination.
I'm also voting to elevate Djimon Hounsou to lead for Blood Diamond. He's on-screen for 40.73% of the time of this ersatz serio-buddy-action-adventure film. The film begins with his discovery of the diamond, gives him the strongest emotional stakes in wanting the return of his son, and ends with his journey to speak at the United Nations (or something, right?). Even though Leonardo DiCaprio has more screen-time with 58.03%, Hounsou's Solomon Vandy seems a clear co-lead to me.
But would he be nominated? I'm biased. I saw a sneak preview of a close-to-finished Blood Diamond and didn't think highly of it. I never rewatched it but I can't imagine it was much better. I remember thinking it was out of the race. So, when Hounsou won the National Board of Review Award for Best Supporting Actor, it caught me by surprise to say nothing of when DiCaprio ended up nominated for that performance (and that accent) over his career-best work in The Departed. Hounsou is quite good in Blood Diamond, probably the best thing, if memory serves. Even though Best Actor that year was a bit weak, I don't think he'd make it in.
I see only one citation for Djimon Hounsou for Best Actor for Blood Diamond: the Women Film Critics Circle Awards.
Nor do I think Cate Blanchett would make it in for her leading performance in Notes on a Scandal. She is in that film for 56.24% of the running-time, vs. Judi Dench's 60.83% of the running-time. This was a clear case of a two-hander in my opinion, where Blanchett comes across a bit more submissive in that her sexual advances don't constitute the drive of the narrative. They're more hidden and off to the side. It's Oscar politics. I don't think that Cate Blanchett would have been nominated for Best Actress.
If we're going to be sticklers to appropriate placement:
*Whitaker remains in Best Actor.
*Hudson rises to Best Actress.
*Hounsou and Blanchett would lose their nominations.
*Holding off on Streep. While I really like the idea of Streep winning Best Supporting Actress for The Devil Wears Prada, probably her most defining 21st century performance, I'm wondering if it's appropriate.
