I could not agree more.
-
ObscureAuteur — 11 years ago(September 07, 2014 10:52 AM)
I have only one objection, and the only objective objection, to her Oscar win. That objection is that it is yet another example of nomination of a leading actress in the supporting category who then wins because, of course, her work was bigger and bolder than others in an actual supporting role. Since there is
no
other prominent female role in the movie she is by default the leading actress, and the role is certainly a leading role, and therefore should not even be eligible for nomination in the supporting category at all.
This business seems to be poorly defined. "Supporting" usually seems to mean "Not the top billed star" and has little to do with the actual role. We have instances where two are rightly nominated in the same category e.g
Judgement at Nuremberg
where Schell won over Tracy, and other instances where the two leads are split between leading and supporting e.g.
The Miracle Worker
that enables two wins but clearly abuses the supporting category. That is unless you think a young actress is automatically supporting by virtue of being young. This rationale worked for "supporting actress" Tatum O'Neal in
Paper Moon
where again there no more prominent female lead, and worked against co-nominee Madeline Kahn in a true supporting role. Sometimes the result of the single category nomination is that both lose, possibly due to vote splitting over one work, e.g.
Midnight Cowboy
(a controversial film, rated X (!), and two unpleasant characters. Sentiment that they "owed one" to John Wayne gave the voters an easy out The controversy did not prevent the movie winning Best Picture, Director and Writing. Not unlike the later situation and outcome for
Brokeback Mountain
only rated "R" not "NC-17", three Oscars but not the "hot" ones, Best Picture or Best Actor). Some think that Lauren Bacall was robbed in this fashion for
The Mirror Has Two Faces
against winner Juliette Binoche in The
English Patient
(and despite any possible sentiment that Bacall was "owed one") when Binoche's role was of leading actress magnitude. At least there was another nominated leading actress in that movie with an arguably larger role to justify this nomination, unlike
My Cousin Vinny
.
A mess, and one that is and will inevitably repeated regularly.
Despite all the dubious fun generated (the endless argument and the red carpet nonsense around the ceremony itself) I agree with George C. Scott that the whole thing is a bad idea and the craft, if not the business, would be better off without it.
CB
Good Times, Noodle Salad -
rascal67 — 11 years ago(September 12, 2014 07:44 PM)
.another example of nomination of a leading actress in the supporting category who then wins because, of course, her work was bigger and bolder than others in an actual supporting role.
How would you know that this is the reason that Tomei won and that voters chose to cast for Tomei because it was a more substantial role, than her fellow nominees? This is just speculation. If the voting tally was made public and the runner up's were revealed and by what margin of votes, then more grounded opinions could be formed.
I agree with what you are saying about category fraud and Tomei was technically the lead female in this film. However, due to her being relatively unknown to feature films and she was in support of Pesci's characterwhich was a showcase for his comic talentsI feel she can just get away with the "support" category. She wasn't carrying the film with her performance, although she is a huge asset to it. Anthony Hopkins, in 'Silence Of The Lambs'-91', could be considered support, but due to his strong characterization and the skillful manner in which his scenes were blended and edited into the film, he left us with a strong and indelible "lead" impression.
I would consider 1992 an exceptionally strong year for support ladies and anyone of the nominees could have a strong argument made for them winning, regardless of the amount of screen-time or genre of film. I feel that this is the reason why Tomei copped a lot of flack, due to her stiff competition, being a light comedy, (acting and film purists were offended) and her sole status as the only American in the lineup. -
JosephASpadaro — 10 years ago(November 12, 2015 09:01 PM)
I have only one objection, and the only objective objection, to her Oscar win. That objection is that it is yet another example of nomination of a leading actress in the supporting category who then wins because, of course, her work was bigger and bolder than others in an actual supporting role. Since there is no other prominent female role in the movie she is by default the leading actress, and the role is certainly a leading role, and therefore should not even be eligible for nomination in the supporting category at all.
This business seems to be poorly defined. "Supporting" usually seems to mean "Not the top billed star" and has little to do with the actual role. We have instances where two are rightly nominated in the same category e.g Judgement at Nuremberg where Schell won over Tracy, and other instances where the two leads are split between leading and supporting e.g. The Miracle Worker that enables two wins but clearly abuses the supporting category. That is unless you think a young actress is automatically supporting by virtue of being young. This rationale worked for "supporting actress" Tatum O'Neal in Paper Moon where again there no more prominent female lead, and worked against co-nominee Madeline Kahn in a true supporting role. Sometimes the result of the single category nomination is that both lose, possibly due to vote splitting over one work, e.g. Midnight Cowboy (a controversial film, rated X (!), and two unpleasant characters. Sentiment that they "owed one" to John Wayne gave the voters an easy out The controversy did not prevent the movie winning Best Picture, Director and Writing. Not unlike the later situation and outcome for Brokeback Mountain only rated "R" not "NC-17", three Oscars but not the "hot" ones, Best Picture or Best Actor). Some think that Lauren Bacall was robbed in this fashion for The Mirror Has Two Faces against winner Juliette Binoche in The English Patient (and despite any possible sentiment that Bacall was "owed one") when Binoche's role was of leading actress magnitude. At least there was another nominated leading actress in that movie with an arguably larger role to justify this nomination, unlike My Cousin Vinny.
A mess, and one that is and will inevitably repeated regularly.
Despite all the dubious fun generated (the endless argument and the red carpet nonsense around the ceremony itself) I agree with George C. Scott that the whole thing is a bad idea and the craft, if not the business, would be better off without it.
Yours is an excellent post. Thanks. I just addressed this very issue in another post of mine, up above. I will copy-and-paste it here below:
Another person stated:
I also had no idea there was the slightest hint that this was not a deserved Oscar win. I had no idea she was 'supporting' - I thought she was the star along with Pesci.
My reply was:
Tomei certainly was a star in the film (along side with Pesci, of course). Whether a performance is considered "leading actress" or "supporting actress", however, is all politics.
In other words, if the studio thinks that the actress does not stand a chance in the "leading" category, they simply list her role as "supporting", assuming that she stands a better chance in the latter category.
Whether the role is, in fact, a leading or a supporting role is entirely beside the point.
Hollywood politics.
That being said, Tomei turned in a stellar performance. As we all know, the Academy doesn't take too kindly to comedies, in general. They prefer other genres. But, I assume, acting in a comedic role is just as much "hard work" as acting in a dramatic role (if not more so).
Did she deserve an Oscar? I'd say "yeah". Did she deserve this Oscar? I dunno. I'd have to check who the other four contenders were to make my final decision.
A few years back, I actually "looked into" this matter. I think that I called or emailed the Academy. The basic response was: the members themselves decide in any way that they wish what constitutes a "leading" role and what constitutes a "supporting" role. There are no rules or guidelines, whatsoever (except, perhaps, for common sense).
But as with any competition people will learn to "game the system" and that has certainly happened here (with the leading/supporting ambiguities).
Throw in Hollywood politics, on top of all that. And greed (the producers wanting as many awards as possible). And ego (the actors wanting to win). It's all a recipe for disaster. It is ripe for abuse and, many times, that abuse occurs.
As you said, it's unfair to nominate a "leading performance" in the "supporting" category, because the actors/actresses who truly are "supporting" will, by definition, be at a disadvantage. The "leading role" (even it's it arbitrarily called "supporting") will always outshine them. And that's just not fair. It's not fair to anyone: leads or supports.
That being said: what "rules" could the Academy possibly set forth to define a "lead" role versus a "support" role? -
OccasionalPoster — 10 years ago(October 21, 2015 07:56 AM)
So I just watched
My Cousin Vinny
and I have to agree - Marisa Tomei did deserve the Oscar. She was funny as hell and somehow, I was more drawn to her character than Joe Pesci's character. I've yet to see
The Crying Game
but I'll have to when I get the chance to see what I think of Miranda Richardson.
But honestly, I think it is refreshing a modern comedic performance won because honestly, when does that happen? I've heard a saying that goes, "There is no business more serious than comedy." I have to agree with that statement and see the irony. In drama, you can act circles and cry and give off all of these emotions. It is easier to act out a mopey person than play someone who brings laughs for the viewers on top of giving an authentic performance. But in a comedy, if you don't have much wit to pull it off, your performance will stink and it will show. Comedy is not as easy as it looks. But actors make it look so easy especially the good ones.
Marisa Tomei was also really hot in this movie. It's weird to think with most "Oscar worthy" performances, you have to get ugly and play a hag, an old maid, or someone disabled basically. -
skeetchtvs — 10 years ago(November 09, 2015 07:29 AM)
I agree she deserved the win, she was fantastic in this film. It's rare to see Comedic performances being nominated for Oscars, let alone winning, so it's a nice change. She definitely deserved it, she was perfect for the role. Her chemistry with Joe Pesci was also very good.
-
JosephASpadaro — 10 years ago(November 12, 2015 09:17 PM)
I have to laugh, as I read through this thread.
Many people claim that Tomei deserved the Oscar. As I read all those posts, I wonder to myself: how many of these posters have even actually
seen
the other four films nominated?"
My guess is a very, very, very low number. Probably pretty close to zero, quite frankly.
This IMDb page, obviously, attracts people who are "fans" of this film (
My Cousin Vinny
).
If you look at the other four films nominated (that is, the competition for Tomei), you will see:- Marisa Tomei
My Cousin Vinny
as Mona Lisa Vito
(winner) - Judy Davis
Husbands and Wives
as Sally Wainwright - Joan Plowright
Enchanted April
as Mrs. Fisher - Vanessa Redgrave
Howards End
as Ruth Wilcox - Miranda Richardson
Damage
as Ingrid Fleming
My guess is that hardly anyone on this board saw even
one
of those films. And I am quite certain that no one saw all five films. At the very least, the nature of those other four films does not seem to be the type of genre that would also appeal to film-goers who loved
My Cousin Vinny
(as a generalization).
So, you can only say "Tomei deserved the Oscar" with any credibility if, in fact, you have seen all five performances.
If you have not seen any of the other films (or have seen only one or two of them), your "vote" (opinion) lacks all credibility. It's just a fancy way of saying "I like Marisa Tomei! I am a fan of hers. I think she was great in this film!" And, quite frankly, that's not "good enough" to qualify her for the Oscar win.
In other words, you can't really offer a valid or credible opinion on the matter unless you have seen all five of the nominated performances. And I am pretty surprised at how adamant some people are, when their opinion is essentially meaningless (if all five films were not seen).
- Marisa Tomei
-
preppy-3 — 10 years ago(December 02, 2015 01:06 PM)
Well I saw all five films with those nominations and I seriously thought it was going to Judy Davis for "Husbands and Wives". Don't get me wrongTomei was GREAT but the Academy never gives acting awards to comedies. It DOES happen (Kevin Kline for "A Fish Called Wanda") but it's rare. I was a bit surprised when she won but I think she deserved it. She stole every single scene she's in and was hysterical. Still it was a surprise. The fact that she was well-liked and Davis isn't might have helped.
-
JosephASpadaro — 10 years ago(December 03, 2015 06:41 AM)
Yes, I think she had a great performance. There's not much doubt about that.
I can't compare her performance to the other four, as I did not see them.
You did. But, I am certain, you are in a very rare minority. Especially among the fans of
My Cousin Vinny
.
And, true, Oscar does not "like" (or favor) comedies, as a general rule.
I myself was not impressed with Kline's
A Fish Called Wanda
performance. But that's probably because I really don't like Kline at all. -
Mercader79 — 10 years ago(February 04, 2016 02:22 AM)
1992: Rumours abound that Jack Palance read out the wrong name during his announcement of the Best Supporting Actress winner Marisa Tomei. In fact, this is impossible: only one name is ever on the card, the name of the winner. Marisa Tomei in fact thoroughly deserved to win for My Cousin Vinny (even though it was a surprise result). That said, Palance did seem to be in a somewhat tired and emotional state as he announced the award.
http://bit.ly/1mfyUnq -
drunkbear — 9 years ago(May 11, 2016 01:03 PM)
Anybody remember the animated show 'The Critic?' The titles used to start with the phone by Jay Sherman's bedside ringing
phone rings
Jay Sherman:[sleepily] Hello?
Satan: Jay, this is the Devil! Regardless of what you may believe, I am NOT the reason Cher won an Oscar! I AM the reason Marisa Tomei won an Oscar! BWAHAHAHAHA!" click- HOW kin I be so brainless, when I is so smart?