James Earl Jones Shouldve won the Oscar
One of the best actors in his most ambitious role.
shareAre you kidding? He was good, but no that good.
shareMost of his part was based on seduction, impressions, mysticism, and acting. Not much fighting for a fighting type of movie. He also left a strong impression on the movie even though he wasnt the lead.
shareTrue; also he has very little screen time; and yet makes a huge and memorable impact on the film. Granted, it is hard to go so far as to say he deserved an oscar. Despite I think the Academy is bias against high fantasy films, Conan the Barbarian is an admittedly campy film. It is great and I love it; and think Jones's performance is legendary; but that might be because of my personal preference for this film.
shareFirst of all I think it is one of his most impressive roles where he is actually lead and acting not given Mass Villian Vader who you might even consider given his massive cultural impact and popularity. Secondly though I think Arnold was the perfect Conan you can say he bestest him even in the end where you feel cheated from a fight scene and it is almost impressive, daring, and majestic how he challenged Conan unarmed, without guards, without his followers protecting him or fighting for him. Though Conan was the much stronger guy he had no fear of him and in the end you end you might end up pondering if he even won? Through Thulsa teaching he might’ve surmised him and dying could’ve been part of his plan.
I also say this because this role is so dangerous. It could be a career killer and James I never recalled having another such role. He killed women mercilessly, brain controlled virgin women to their deaths, became a snake, killed followers, had zero regrets, AND PLAYED IT WELL!!!
I agree with all of this; Thulsa Doom is arguably one of Jones's best performances. It is mesmerizing, memorable and effective. I guess a way of saying it is, if Anthony Hopkins deserved an oscar for the role of Hannibal in Silence of the Lambs, you would think that Jones's performance here would be at least an honorable mention. Especially considering the contenders that year.
shareYea well with the losers getting oscars today and Hannibal winning for less time he shouldve been considered, at least. There have been few very such bad guys and played well. I think it is universally acclaimed and an unexpected surprised. He played a fantasy epic one of the best and most memorable in a theatre presence.
shareDepends on what you mean by "not that good". He is only in a few scenes and really steals the show each time. In many of the scenes he is acting enough to not only deliver his own role but really boosts Arnold's delivery too. Also, it is often an unspoken role that high fantasy films never got oscar recognition (LOTR being a rare exception). You can make an argument that is wrong and that all films should be given equal consideration despite the genre.
If you would make an argument that James Earl Jones was not "good" enough in this film to warrant oscar consideration you would have to acknowledge that perhaps it was wrong to consider Anthony Hopkins for Silence of the Lambs. (note I love Hopkins and his role in that film). I think to write off Jones's as not even a possibility as an oscar is a reflection of this bias.