Actors who should have been nominated for an Oscar but weren't

  • After Iowa State won the Big 12, a Cyclone made a wonderful offer to We Will that now increases our match. Now all gifts up to $400,000 between now and the Final 4 will be matched. Please consider giving at We Will Collective.
    This notice can be dismissed using the upper right corner X button.

Bipolarcy

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2008
2,966
1,771
113
I was thinking about this the other day and wanted to hear some other opinions. My opinion is probably more than slightly out there, but I think Jon Heder should have at least been nominated for Napoleon Dynamite and he probably should have won. I know that movie is polarizing. You either hated it or you loved it (I think if you hated it, you just didn't get it, but that's another topic.)

I know you're probably saying right now, "this guy is nuts," but hear me out on Heder. If you have seen him in any other movie or in interviews, you probably didn't even recognize him at first. In fact, you probably said at one point, "this is the guy who played Napoleon Dynamite?" Isn't that what good acting is? Being able to pull off playing someone who is the complete opposite of your personality and making it believable?

Sean Penn won the Oscar in 2004 for best actor in Mystic River for playing a character he plays in just about every movie he's in. Was that role a stretch for him? I doubt it, since he's played it so many times. Others nominated that year were Jude law in Cold Mountain, Johnny Depp in Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl, Ben Kingsley in House of Sand and Fog (a movie nobody watched) and Bill Murray in Lost In Translation. Johnny Depp was more deserving of the Oscar, IMO, because his role was a stretch for him. Heder at least deserved a nomination for playing a role that was equally as challenging.

Blast away.
 

RubyClone

Active Member
Mar 21, 2014
3,110
17
38
Two things.

1) I hated Napolean Dynamite. I got it. It was just dumb. :spinny:

2) This kinda goes against your premise, as I realize he was nominated. But I was watching Lincoln the other night and for the life of me, I can't get over the fact Tommy Lee Jones didn't win best supporting for his role in that movie. I love about everything Chrisoph Waltz does, and he was certainly worthy of the oscar. But TLJ was fantastic.
 

weR138

Well-Known Member
Feb 20, 2008
12,187
5,137
113
It's remarkable to me that Marlon Brando nor Martin Sheen were nominated for Apocalypse Now. I can see how Sheen might've been a bit weak for best actor but Brando as supporting actor for me would've been a lock. His monologue about joining SF and the inoculation of the Vietnamese children is amazing.
 

roundball

Well-Known Member
Dec 8, 2013
5,038
88
48
Iowa City area
I don't know how John Cazale was never nominated for an Oscar, especially when every single movie he was in was nominated for Best Picture. I guess he's a victim of there just being so many other good roles at the time.

He's like the Steve Kerr of acting...always overshadowed by the other great players on his team.
 
Last edited:

Cyclonetrombone

Well-Known Member
Aug 25, 2010
1,238
245
63
Madison, Wisconsin
I'd argue that Heder played basically the same character in Blades of Glory and The Benchwarmers... he's a poor mans Will Farrell.

Also... put me in the crowd that saw Napoleon Dynamite, understood it, and still hates that movie
 

clones26

Well-Known Member
Nov 8, 2006
2,832
147
63
40
Urbandale
Not to hijack the thread but Jon Heder was awesome in Benchwarmers, which is my guilty pleasure movie along with Empire Records
 

GTO

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2014
28,024
36,705
113
North DFW, TX
Being able to pull off playing someone who is the complete opposite of your personality and making it believable?

I get what you're saying. I always hated when people said Eminem was great in 8 Mile. It was a story where he portrayed himself and everything that he went through. In other words, just re-enact what you already did before. How hard is that?
 

ISUCyclones2015

Doesn't wipe standing up
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Dec 19, 2010
13,861
9,203
113
Chicago, IL
Not to hijack the thread but Jon Heder was awesome in Benchwarmers, which is my guilty pleasure movie along with Empire Records

Oh man... I haven't seen or heard that movie in a long time... I might have to pull out the VHS of that I have.
 

bos

Legend
Staff member
Apr 10, 2006
29,671
5,256
113
Paris Hilton - House of Wax

tumblr_moytfrYO3v1rzagpno1_400.gif
 

3TrueFans

Just a Happily Married Man
Sep 10, 2009
59,147
52,905
113
44
Ames
I'll say Alan Rickman, been in some good movies and played some good roles, Die Hard, Harry Potter, Robin Hood, Sweeney Todd. Other possibilities are Donald Sutherland, Steve Buscemi, Jim Carrey and John Goodman.
 

Bipolarcy

Well-Known Member
Oct 27, 2008
2,966
1,771
113
I'll say Alan Rickman, been in some good movies and played some good roles, Die Hard, Harry Potter, Robin Hood, Sweeney Todd. Other possibilities are Donald Sutherland, Steve Buscemi, Jim Carrey and John Goodman.

You didn't even mention Rickman's best role: Something the Lord Made. Of course, it was a made for TV movie, but I still found it enjoyable.

I also enjoyed him in Quigley Down Under and Galaxy Quest (one of my guilty pleasures).
 

GTO

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2014
28,024
36,705
113
North DFW, TX
You didn't even mention Rickman's best role: Something the Lord Made. Of course, it was a made for TV movie, but I still found it enjoyable.

I also enjoyed him in Quigley Down Under and Galaxy Quest (one of my guilty pleasures).

Galaxy Quest... I think I laughed during that movie more than everyone around me expected.
 

Clonefan32

Well-Known Member
Nov 19, 2008
21,706
22,570
113
My question is, why would someone cast an actor for a part that is nothing that their personality? If I needed someone to play a stoic, serious character, why would I cast someone that is a goofy comedian and hope they can pull of stoic and serious? Critics seem to get all excited when someone plays a "stretch" role, like Charlize Theron in Monster or whatever. So the mark of true acting is acting fat and ugly when you aren't fat and ugly?
 

GTO

Well-Known Member
Mar 25, 2014
28,024
36,705
113
North DFW, TX
I don't think it is about it always being a "stretch" character, as much as something outside their comfort zone. Some actors are great, but they perform the same role over and over and over. Pacino and Deniro are great examples. Both good actors, but it is the same character in all their movies, with the same mannerisms, facial expressions, Pacino yells, Pacino talks without looking at the person he is talking to (although that was perfect for Scent of a Woman),etc. Every once in a while they go out on a limb but, for the most part, you could transplant their character from one of their movies to another and it would still work.
 

Cyclones_R_GR8

Well-Known Member
SuperFanatic
SuperFanatic T2
Feb 10, 2007
22,573
24,033
113
Omaha
My question is, why would someone cast an actor for a part that is nothing that their personality? If I needed someone to play a stoic, serious character, why would I cast someone that is a goofy comedian and hope they can pull of stoic and serious? Critics seem to get all excited when someone plays a "stretch" role, like Charlize Theron in Monster or whatever. So the mark of true acting is acting fat and ugly when you aren't fat and ugly?
Robin Williams was great in serious roles and he was as goofy comedian as you could get.