MovieChat Forums > Sounder (1973) Discussion > Paul Winfield should have been nominated...

Paul Winfield should have been nominated Supporting Actor

posted 11 years ago by edlitz36
5 replies | jump to latest

Nominating him for best leading actor wasn't appropriate. After David visits his father in lockup, Martin isn't in the film for 40 minutes (1hr 45min film), except for the short dream sequence. David was the focus of the story, not Martin, if anything the son should have been nominated for best actor.

They bumped Al Pacino in The Godfather down to a supporting actor nomination, when he was clearly the lead of the film (both in screen time and the focal character). I suppose they did that since Michael Caine and Laurence Olivier were both nominated for best actor for Sleuth, that they didn't want to have another dual best actor nomination with The Godfather, so they nominated Brando for lead and Pacino for supporting.

Religion should be made fun of. If I believed that stuff, I'd keep it to myself. -Larry David

[–] joedonato234 10 years ago

It was Paramount who pushed Pacino into the supporting actor category, so as to give Brando a better shot. This was back in the day when the studio had the big say what category actors went in. Pacino was pissed off enough that he refused to attend the ceremonies.

[–] sansradio 9 years ago

Yeah, reminds me of the All About Eve debacle, when Anne Baxter lobbied to be nominated as Best Actress, splitting the vote for Bette Davis...and the Oscar went to Judy Holliday. By all rights, Hooks probably should have been nominated for Best Actor and would have been had the film been released today; perhaps age and Mr. Winfield's slightly longer Hollywood resume at the time played into his Best Actor nod, which he certainly deserved as well.

Helga, I'm not mad at you; I'm mad at the dirt.

[–] joedonato234 9 years ago

Like I said, back around this time the studio had the big say what category you should go in. Winfield was promoted by his studio for Best Actor. I gotta admit I never understood the hostility towards Baxter and her nomination. She was a leading actress. Or co-lead if you will. I'm judging by the role and not comparing her star status against Bette Davis'. In fact Davis has only a quick moment in the last twenty minutes of the film. And the film is called "All About Eve" for a reason.

[–] sansradio 9 years ago

Are we discussing the same film? Davis actually has the prominent part throughout the film, with more lines than Baxter. Her Margo Channing is the driving force of the screenplay. Co-lead, I'll grant you. Davis herself said that Baxter was to be nominated as Supporting Actress, but had such a fit with Zanuck and the other studio bigs that they relented and submitted her for lead consideration with the Academy. As per the "last twenty minutes," maybe you're conflating Eve (1950) with Phone Call from a Stranger (1952), in which Davis indeed only appears in the last reel. Cheers and thanks for responding!

Helga, I'm not mad at you; I'm mad at the dirt.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]