Best Actor 1956

[ksrymy]

I had to give this one to Olivier. His Richard III is iconic in the Shakespearean world. Yul Brynner's performance was nothing special. This is really a contest between Olivier and Douglas but I came away from Lust for Life feeling that Anthony Quinn stole the spotlight from Kirk Douglas while Olivier was able to keep all focus on himself. That's the deciding factor.

However, my own personal nominees would have been
__________________________________________________
James Dean - Giant
Kirk Douglas - Lust for Life
ROGER DUCHESNE - BOB LE FLAMBEUR
Laurence Olivier - Richard III
John Wayne - The Searchers

Easily one of the more difficult years to choose a winner from. John Wayne is absolutely electric in The Searchers but why I picked Roger Duchesne in the French New Wave heist flick 'Bob le flambeur' is because Duchesne is absolutely able to command attention with his cool, calm, collected demeanor while still showing his paranoia in his eyes and subtle movements.

[Big Magilla]

I can't help but recall the late John Harkness' chastisement here for my preferring Minnelli's other 1956 film, Tea and Sympathy to ]i]Lust for Life[/i], although I still think Lust is a good film and Douglas' best nominated performance. That said, though, I haven't revisited it or his other two nominated performances in many years. I never really liked him much.

For those who don't know, Harkness was a Tornoto based film critic and author of The Oscar Handbookthat was published annually from 1993-2003. It wasn't anywhere nearly as good as Damien's Inside Oscar. He was a hard drinker and card player - he was the "poker consultant" for the 1995 TV series, Tilt. He died suddenly of a heart attack in December, 2005 at 53, the first prolific member of our little group known to have passed away.

[The Original BJ]

I revisited Lust for Life the other day. It was the first time I'd seen it since my Minnelli class in college, and I was sorry to find that I liked it even less than I did the first go-round. I think it's one of the least exciting of the director's major works, alternately dull and overly theatrical, and with a DRAMATIC score that often isn't doing anyone any favors.

I do think Kirk Douglas does commanding work in a lot of the movie. (Especially in the "You paint too fast!"/"You look too fast!" fight with Anthony Quinn, a scene that is thankfully devoid of unnecessary underscore, and which both actors pitch at just the right level.) But there are a handful of scenes where I think Douglas is just too intense, and while I don't think this causes the movie to dip into the laughable, it comes a lot closer than I'd like. I can understand why he won the NY critics prize (and received a solid number of votes in our poll), but I don't think this work is special enough to merit the "robbed of Oscar" designation many have bestowed upon it. (I think Douglas's Bad and the Beautiful work is substantially superior to this.)

Needless to say, I shouldn't have second-guessed my original vote for Yul Brynner.

[flipp525]

Has any cast album hit the top ten, let alone number one, post-Hair? Maybe the Wiz? I can't think of any after that.

The Original Broadway recording of Rent was a virtual fixture in most dorms during my college years. I also think that several folks can attest to the endurance of A Chorus Line well throughout the 70's and 80's.

[The Original BJ]

All right, I couldn't leave well enough alone, so I tried to refresh my several years-old memory of these performances by looking at a bunch of clips.

And Yul Brynner is a bit more broad than I'd remembered -- it's a very fun performance, but a lot of it is the same big gestures over and over.

I actually think Olivier is a bit big too, though in this case, I'd fault Director Olivier more than Actor Olivier, for sometimes putting the camera too close to a performance that surely would have been more impressive on stage.

Douglas has his over-the-top moments as well (the ear-cutting scene totally fits into Mister Tee's description of the movie as "hysterical"), but he also has a number of scenes that really cut to the bone emotionally. I think today I'd probably vote for Douglas, completely aware that tomorrow I'd likely choose...somebody else.

[Okri]

FWIW, I just heard "Defying Gravity" on the radio this morning.

[Big Magilla]

I've been continuing to think about this race over the past couple days. When I started writing my initial post, I felt like I would probably vote for Douglas or Olivier. But then, when I got to actually writing about those two, I realized I admired both performances, but didn't feel truly passionate about either one. Plus, I assume both those actors would have received my votes in earlier races, had I seen all the nominees in certain years, so I didn't really feel pressed to pick them again. (Olivier also has plenty of solid work up ahead.)

And I looked at that ballot, and there was Yul Brynner, in a movie that isn't any kind of masterpiece but which is plenty entertaining, in a role that fit him like a glove, and which was his obvious career high. And I thought, why not cast my vote for the candidate I feel some affection for? Perhaps Oscar voters made him a compromise choice in the same way.

Since I voted, I've been having a slight case of buyer's remorse -- maybe I should have gone with one of my other possibilities, both of whom would be more serious choices? -- but then again, I'd probably feel that way no matter who I'd have picked. I think it's actually pretty appropriate that the votes this year have been distributed in such an even-handed manner.

I agree. This is one of those years where if I keep changing my mind as well.

I still think Olivier's Richard III is his best Shakeseare on film performance, but I also think one award for one of his Shakespearean roles is enough. I think he deserves an additonal award for an upcoming non-Shakespearean role, though probably not the same one as Italiano thinsk he should win for.

Today I would cast my vote for Kirk Douglas instead.

[Big Magilla]

Billboard started charting cast albums separately in 2006. Apparently you need a subscription to Billboard to research the lists, but I woud think that although cast recordigns have long since become a niche market the staying power of cast recordings reamins strong. Total sales for Les Miserables in its various recordings over the last quarter century probably exceed total sales of most of Billboard's here today-forgotten tomorrow number one chart toppers during the same period.

[Mister Tee]

Has any cast album hit the top ten, let alone number one, post-Hair? Maybe the Wiz? I can't think of any after that.

Les Miserables?

Couldn't find any evidence through Googling "Les Miserables cast album Billboard".

I should have added, Jesus Christ Superstar doesn't count, because the album preceded the Broadway production.

[Greg]

Has any cast album hit the top ten, let alone number one, post-Hair? Maybe the Wiz? I can't think of any after that.

Les Miserables?

[Mister Tee]

Very good point, Magilla. The My Fair Lady original cast album was the top-seller for two years running. Even into the early/mid-60s, when rock and roll had totally taken over the singles charts, cast albums for The Sound of Music, Camelot and Hello Dolly! were tops in their years.

Another tradition gone with the wind. Has any cast album hit the top ten, let alone number one, post-Hair? Maybe the Wiz? I can't think of any after that.

[Big Magilla]

Not only is there no quivalent of the Ed Sullivan Show, Original Cast albums, which were huge record sellers from the introduction of the LP in 1949 (?) through the mid-sixties, helped make the stars of Broadway musicals into household names. Non-musical actors and actresses didn't achieve the same recognitoin until they were seen on screen, but their stage reputations were well known within the industry.

[Mister Tee]

I think you could argue that gay musical comedy fans are all honorary five-borough dwellers.

Certainly some people have moved from stage success to movies. Viola Davis is the only Oscar nominee I can come up with off-hand, but Nathan Lane, Cherry Jones and Kristen Chenoweth, for example, have made their presence somewhat known in other media.

But I had in mind people who became nationally famous merely from a major Broadway appearance -- in the way that Mary Martin, Julie Andrews, Carol Channing and Barbra Streisand did back in the day. I of course lived in Queens and was privy to Broadway more than some, but it's my impression all those folk were quite well known in a way that, say, Donna Murphy, Idina Menzel, Brian Stokes-Mitchell and Christine Ebersole are not, despite their clear ability.

Maybe it's just because there's no Ed Sullivan Show anymore to give performers the exposure they got back then.

[flipp525]

Those days are of course gone -- Sutton Foster may well win her second Tony this year, but her name recognition outside the five boroughs is zero.

Eh, that's not necessarily true re: Sutton Foster. She has a large fan contingent here in D.C. at least (especially among the gays). When she performed an evening of songs at The Kennedy Center a couple months back, it was the talk of the town.

Isn't there a small handful of Broadway type actresses/actors who've parlayed stage acclaim into nominations in the past decade or so? Not that I can name any examples at the moment, of course.



Edited By flipp525 on 1302800388

[The Original BJ]

I've been continuing to think about this race over the past couple days. When I started writing my initial post, I felt like I would probably vote for Douglas or Olivier. But then, when I got to actually writing about those two, I realized I admired both performances, but didn't feel truly passionate about either one. Plus, I assume both those actors would have received my votes in earlier races, had I seen all the nominees in certain years, so I didn't really feel pressed to pick them again. (Olivier also has plenty of solid work up ahead.)

And I looked at that ballot, and there was Yul Brynner, in a movie that isn't any kind of masterpiece but which is plenty entertaining, in a role that fit him like a glove, and which was his obvious career high. And I thought, why not cast my vote for the candidate I feel some affection for? Perhaps Oscar voters made him a compromise choice in the same way.

Since I voted, I've been having a slight case of buyer's remorse -- maybe I should have gone with one of my other possibilities, both of whom would be more serious choices? -- but then again, I'd probably feel that way no matter who I'd have picked. I think it's actually pretty appropriate that the votes this year have been distributed in such an even-handed manner.