Peter O'Toole Oscar Nomination Number Six: An Analysis

PETER O'TOOLE OSCAR NOMINATION NUMBER SIX: 

AN ANALYSIS

On his sixth Academy Award nomination, Peter O'Toole faced yet again more insurmountable odds to have much chance of winning the long-elusive Oscar. Two of his competitors were in Best Picture nominees. Three were already Oscar winners. However, O'Toole's nominated performance for The Stunt Man actually had a slight leg-up on at least two of his fellow Oscar nominees. 

This would be the last nomination that O'Toole received for a film where he was not that film's sole nomination. Out of his eight overall career nominations, three (The Ruling Class, My Favorite Year and Venus) were for films where only his work was singled out for recognition. Out of these, only The Ruling Class came prior to this particular nomination. 

This time, it was different. His Best Actor nomination for The Stunt Man was one of three that the film received. Besides the nod for O'Toole, The Stunt Man received two other surprisingly high-end nominations. One was for Best Adapted Screenplay. The third was for Best Director. This nod is a somewhat ironic nomination given that O'Toole played a tyrannical director in The Stunt Man. This indicates, if not strong support for The Stunt Man, at least a greater awareness among Academy members of the film. For once, Peter O'Toole was not the nominee whose nomination was that film's sole nomination.

That distinction went to Jack Lemmon, who was on his seventh career nomination for Tribute. Lemmon was Tribute's only Oscar nomination that year. As such, it was Lemmon, not O'Toole, who had even less of a chance at winning Best Actor. O'Toole had another advantage when it came to fellow nominee Robert Duvall. The Great Santini had scored only two nominations: one for Duvall as Best Actor and one for Michael O'Keefe as Best Supporting Actor. As such, the chances of Lemmon winning were almost nil. Duvall had a slightly better chance, but not by much. The Great Santini did not leave as great an impression on the Academy as The Stunt Man. In retrospect, Peter O'Toole had a slightly, slightly stronger chance to best two of his rivals.

The unfortunate thing for O'Toole, however, was that his two other nominees were in stronger positions to win. Both Robert De Niro and John Hurt were in films that were tied for the most Oscar nominations that year. Raging Bull and The Elephant Man each received eight nominations. Raging Bull and The Elephant Man were battling it out not just in Best Actor. They faced off against each other in Best Picture, Best Director and Best Film Editing as well. These are major categories, meaning that Academy voters were watching Raging Bull and The Elephant Man more than The Stunt Man, The Great Santini and especially Tribute. 

Where would O'Toole's chances to finally win stand this year? First, let us look at our choices.

The nominees for Best Actor in a Leading Role for 1980 were

Robert De Niro in Raging Bull

Robert Duvall in The Great Santini

John Hurt in The Elephant Man

Jack Lemmon in Tribute

Peter O'Toole in The Stunt Man

It is a most curious coincidence that two of 1980's Best Picture and Best Actor selections were for black-and-white biopics from two legendary directors: Martin Scorsese and David Lynch. Separate from how good or bad Duvall, Lemmon and/or O'Toole were, the battle was always between Robert De Niro as Jake LaMotta in Raging Bull and John Hurt as John Merrick in The Elephant Man. The other three should have just been glad to be invited. I do not think that any of them had any real shot of pulling an upset. 

Jack Lemmon was probably the least likely to surprise. He was already a two-time Oscar winner by this point. His second win for Save the Tiger had been seven years ago. Therefore, one could say that it had been a while. However, it was not that long of a while. Moreover, as already stated, Lemmon was Tribute's sole nomination. He had been nominated the year before for The China Syndrome. That film received four nominations to Tribute's one. Save the Tiger had, like The Stunt Man, three Oscar nominations. 

As a side note, this would be the second of three occasions when Jack Lemmon and Peter O'Toole would face off for Best Actor. They had first battled in 1962 on Peter O'Toole's first nomination and Jack Lemmon's fourth nomination. They would return to dueling for the prize a mere two years later. They lost on each occasion.  

Oddly, if someone was going to ride an overdue narrative, it was not going to be six-time nominee O'Toole. It was going to be three-time nominee Robert Duvall. He had been nominated those three times within nine years. The Great Santini was his third nomination, but it was his second consecutive nomination after his Best Supporting Actor nomination for Apocalypse Now. He had been more consistent in his nominations than O'Toole, who had gone without a nomination since Duvall's first for The Godfather the same year that The Ruling Class had been nominated. Therefore, Robert Duvall was fresh in Academy members' memory. Peter O'Toole was not.

Still, The Stunt Man was a bigger hit than The Great Santini. It also got three major nominations to The Great Santini's two. Was there any chance that Peter O'Toole could have snuck in? Sadly, no. Again, I go back to how Robert De Niro and John Hurt were dominating everyone else. Raging Bull and The Elephant Man are held up as some of the best films of 1980. The Academy gave each eight nominations. This year, the big question was whether Best Actor would go to a black-and-white biopic or to a black-and-white biopic. It was always going to come down between De Niro and Hurt. We know that in the end, Robert De Niro won that fight. He was one of two Oscars for Raging Bull. The Elephant Man went empty-handed, its 0-8 record one of the worst in Academy history. 

Now, how would I have ranked the nominees? Here is my slate in order from Best to Worst:

Robert De Niro

John Hurt

Robert Duvall

Peter O'Toole

Jack Lemmon

I would like to point out that Donald Sutherland never received a competitive Academy Award nomination in the whole of his career. As of this writing, Richard Gere has not received a competitive Academy Award nomination in the whole of his career. Why do I mention that? Well, it is because Jack Lemmon simply has no business being a nominee this year. 

Jack Lemmon in Tribute is an abomination. I sat in stunned disbelief that this hammy, over-the-top, embarrassing performance was nominated for an Academy Award. Tribute is simply dreadful. It is basically a filmed play, and not a particularly good play either. Lemmon originated the role of Scottie Templeton in Tribute on Broadway. For reasons lost to history, no one either in front or behind the camera apparently understood that what works on a stage does not necessarily work in film. Lemmon was hammy throughout Tribute, playing to the rafters where a more toned-down manner would have done much better. He mugs, he prances, he does funny faces and wears funny costumes, even a chicken outfit. I know that they were going for pathos. They ended up with pathetic.

Jack Lemmon took the slot that could and should have been filled by someone who actually acted rather than made faces. Richard Gere in American Gigolo, his star-making turn, would have made a better choice. Donald Sutherland in that year's Best Picture winner Ordinary People would have made a brilliant choice. Every one of Sutherland's costars was nominated: Mary Tyler Moore for Lead Actress and both Judd Hirsh and Timothy Hutton for Best Supporting Actor, with Hutton winning. Yet the Academy overlooked Sutherland's more nuanced performance for Lemmon's cartoonish performance. 

Tommy Lee Jones in Coal Miner's Daughter would also have done better than Jack Lemmon in Tribute. You also had Jack Nicholson in The Shining, Dabney Coleman in 9 to 5 and John Travolta in Urban Cowboy. Those performances and films are still remembered. No one remembers Tribute. It helps that Nicholson, Coleman and Travolta were actually good in The Shining, 9 to 5 and Urban Cowboy. That is something that cannot be said about Jack Lemmon in Tribute. 

Exactly how bad, how flat-out awful was Jack Lemmon in Tribute? Seeing Sam J. Jones nominated for Best Actor in Flash Gordon makes more sense than Jack Lemmon getting nominated for Best Actor in Tribute. I am being somewhat facetious in saying that it would not surprise me if literal bribes were given and taken to get Jack Lemmon nominated for Tribute. That is how awful, bizarre and inexcusable Lemmon's nomination is. 

I cannot express fully just how much I loathe Jack Lemmon in Tribute. This is a simply inexplicable nomination.

So, of the rest, I sadly have to put Peter O'Toole near the bottom. Why? His performance as crazed director Eli Cross was quite good. It is one of his best. Unfortunately, it is also a case of category fraud to me. I had knocked down Forest Whitaker when he beat out Peter O'Toole for The Last King of Scotland because I thought Whitaker was really a Supporting and not Lead performance. 

In the same vein, I think O'Toole was a Supporting and not Lead performance. Had he been nominated for Best Supporting Actor, I think it would it have been a better fit given his role. He also could have actually won. The Stunt Man is not about Eli Cross. It is about the actual stunt man, Cameron (Steve Railsback). He would have been a more logical choice for Best Lead Actor in The Stunt Man than Peter O'Toole was for that film. 

Just as Lemmon essentially stole a spot for a whole slew of better performances, O'Toole did the same here. The difference though is that Peter O'Toole gave a good performance. Jack Lemmon did not. However, Jack Lemmon's nomination, however flawed, was definitely for a Leading Role. Peter O'Toole's nomination was for a Supporting Role passed off as a Leading one.

I wavered long and hard between the last three. Robert Duvall has a couple of strikes against him. First, few people remember The Great Santini. I take into consideration whether a performance has stood the test of time. Duvall's performance as Bull Meechum is nowhere near bad. In many ways, it is quite exceptional. He balances Bull's brutality with a vulnerability that said brutality hides. That being said, Duvall's brief cameo in To Kill a Mockingbird is better remembered than his turn in The Great Santini. 

Second, he is outmatched by at least one of the great screen performances. The Great Santini is well-acted. It is however not held up as one of Robert Duvall's best performances, let alone compared to his other nominees. 

It is to Robert Duvall's credit that he came very close to pushing John Hurt out to third. It is more impressive when you consider that I kept flipping back and forth between Hurt and Robert De Niro for the top spot. Duvall and De Niro in a head-to-head matchup would have been an easy choice: De Niro. What about Hurt and De Niro?

I wavered greatly between Hurt and De Niro. Both are brilliant. Both have stood the test of time. Sometimes I had John Hurt first. Sometimes I had Robert De Niro first. Ultimately, I went with De Niro because of a few reasons. The complaint that John Hurt had the makeup do some of the heavy acting lifting is not an unfair one. I think it helped Hurt's performance. However, that help is a double-edged sword. 

I also thought which one of the two is the one people still remember, still hold up as one of the all-time greats. That goes to De Niro. He transformed completely. It was not just physically, though there is that. De Niro also brought Jake LaMotta's complexity: that rage mixed with regret which made for compelling viewing. People still talk about Robert De Niro in Raging Bull. People do talk about John Hurt in The Elephant Man. 

They just do not talk about it as much as they do about De Niro's performance. 

Robert De Niro should have won Best Actor for Raging Bull over all the other nominees. His Best Actor win stands.

In conclusion, the Academy made the right choice in not awarding Peter O'Toole the Best Actor Oscar on his sixth nomination.