Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Results

5. Richard Gere in Chicago- Gere throws himself completely into the role which certainly offers some entertainment even if he over does it at some points.

Best Scene: Give em the old razzle dazzle.

4. Dennis Quiad in Far From Heaven- Quiad is somewhat restricted by the writing of his character but he excels in his portrayal of a very repressed man.

Best Scene: Frank tells his wife about his early vacation.

3. Andy Serkis in The Two Towers- Serkis creates a unique and very interesting character through his portrayal Gollum and his multiple personalities.

Best Scene: Smeagol and Gollum face off.

2. Robin Williams in Insomnia- Robin Williams gives probably his best performance giving a chilling performance as a killer who seems absolutely genuine in his innocence even while admitting he is completely guilty.

Best Scene: Walter Finch tells why he murdered the girl. 

1. Bernard Hill in The Two Towers- This is another very personal choice but I love Bernard Hill's work in the Two Towers. He takes a character that could have been a complete throwaway but instead brings such humanity and power into his role of King Théoden.

Best Scene: King Théoden mourns his son.

Overall Rank:

1. Bernard Hill in The Two Towers
2. Christopher Walken in Catch Me If You Can
3. Robin Williams in Insomnia
4. Paul Newman in Road to Perdition
5. Andy Serkis in The Two Towers
6. Brendan Gleeson in 28 Days Later
7. Jude Law in Road to Perdition
8. Daniel Craig in Road to Perdition 
9. Brendan Gleeson in Gangs of New York 
10. Chris Cooper in Adaptation
11. Thomas Kretschmann in The Pianist
12. Sean Astin in The Two Towers
13. Tom Hanks in Catch Me If You Can
14. Dennis Quiad in Far From Heaven
15. Barry Pepper in 25th Hour
16. Christopher Lee in The Two Towers
17. John C. Reilly in Gangs of New York
18. Stephen Dillane in The Hours
19. Eric Tsang in Infernal Affairs
20. Brian Cox in 25th Hour
21. J.K. Simmons in Spider-Man
22. Philip Seymour Hoffman in 25th Hour
23. Anthony Wong in Infernal Affairs
24. Brian Cox in Adaptation
25. Liev Schreiber in The Sum of All Fears
26. Brad Dourif in The Two Towers 
27. George Clooney in Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
28. Ian McKellen in The Two Towers 
29. Cliff Robertson in Spider-Man 
30. Sean Bean in The Two Towers
31. Willem Dafoe in Spider-Man
32. John C. Reilly in Chicago
33. Dennis Haysbert in Far From Heaven
34. Max von Sydow in Minority Report
35. Joaquin Phoenix in Signs
36. Philip Seymour Hoffman in Punch-Drunk Love 
37. Denzel Washington in Antone Fisher
38. Liam Neeson in Gangs of New York 
39. Michael Byrne in The Sum of All Fears
40. Stanley Tucci in Road to Perdition 
41. Richard Harris in The Count of Monte Cristo
42. Ciarian Hinds in The Sum of All Fears
43. Jim Broadbent in Gangs of New York 
44. Billy Boyd in The Two Towers
45. Richard Harris in The Chamber of Secrets
46. Frank Finlay in The Pianist
47. Noah Huntley in 28 Days Later
48. Kenneth Branagh in The Chamber of Secrets
49. Rutger Hauer in Confessions of a Dangerous Mind
50. Christopher Lee in Attack of the Clones
51. Richard Gere in Chicago
52. Luiz Guzman in Punch-Drunk Love
53. Michael Wincott in The Count of Monte Cristo
54. Jason Isaacs in The Chamber of Secrets 
55. Colin Farrell in Minority Report 
56. Alfred Molina in Frida
57. James Cromwell in The Sum of All Fears
58. John C. Reilly in The Hours
59. David Wenham in The Two Towers 
60. Rupert Grint in The Chamber of Secrets
61. Morgan Freeman in The Sum of All FEars
62. John Rhys-Davies in The Two Towers
63. Jeremy Irons in The Time Machine
64. Peter Stormare in Minority Report
65. Alan Bates in Sum of All Fears 
66. Orland Bloom in The Two Towers 
67. Dominic Monaghan in The Two Towers
68. Karl Urban in The Two Towers
69. Tom Wilkinson in The Importance of Being Earnest
70. Guy Pearce in The Count of Monte Cristo
71. Gary Cole in One Hour Photo
72. Tim Blake Nelson in Minority Report 
73. Henry Cavill in The Count of Monte Cristo
74. Christopher Eccleston in 28 Days Later
75. James Franco in Spider-Man
76. Henry Thomas in Gangs of New York 
77. Luis Guzman in the Count of Monte Cristo
78. Rory Culkin in Signs
79. Orlando Jones in The Time Machine
80. Martin Sheen in Catch Me If You Can
81. John Noble in The Two Towers
82. Geoffrey Rush in Frida 
83. Ed Harris in The Hours
84. Rip Torn in Men in Black 2
85. Tony Siragusa in 25th Hour
86. Dermot Mulroney in About Schmidt
87. Dylan Smith in One Hour Photo
88. Michael Madsen in Die Another Day
89. Howard Hesseman in About Schmidt
90. Toby Stephens in Die Another Day
91. Eric Lloyd in The Santa Clause 2
92. Johnny Knoxville in Men in Black 2
93. Rick Yune in Die Another Day
94. Rob Schneider in Mr. Deeds

Next Year: 1950 lead

Read More

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Richard Gere in Chicago

Richard Gere did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite winning the Golden Globe and being nominated for Sag, for portraying Billy Flynn in Chicago. 

Although Billy Flynn is the largest male role in Chicago I don't consider him lead and watching it again only supported my thoughts why. Flynn is almost always viewed through Roxie(Renee Zellweger)'s perspective and even in the one scene where he is not interestingly John C. Reilly actually gets the focus. Gere though does have a very showy part though because of this, and the whole idea is we only ever see Flynn as the hot shot lawyer who is much more of showman than a proper legal consultant. This pretty much means that Gere's point throughout the film is pretty much just to be on the entire time and try to be entertaining as possible while Flynn goes about making Roxie a media darling as well as get her off her murder rap.

 I will start with what I think Gere does do right which is that he seems to be enjoying himself a great deal throughout the film, and particularly all of his musical numbers. This is a very nice variation of things when compared to the oddly grim faces often displayed by Catherin Zeta-Jones and Zellweger. Gere always does bring a nice light touch and a lot of energy into all of scenes. His singing voice not be amazing, but even so he always still seems to bring everything he has to every number anyway. He is always definitely trying to be entertaining though of course how much enjoyment your going to get from the performance does depend a great deal of how much you like Richard Gere as an actor to begin with.

Well I personally I'm just not that crazy about Gere to being with. He is an actor with charisma, but he does not always use the charisma in the very best of ways. He often just kind of has rather than really infusing it into a role to do something really special. More than that though I do feel that Billy Flynn simply could have been a more entertaining character, and I do think maybe the character could have made the film far more enjoyable than it ended up being. He could have been more than just a scene stealer and maybe could have  made scenes work purely from his presence. I will admit that is a tall order, and Gere doesn't quite meet, this challenge sometimes falling quite short even bordering a little on being a bit hammy.

Richard Gere's work does not reach the heights that he potentially could have in the role of Billy Flynn as it does seem the type part is ripe to steal the whole film with which he does not do. I don't think that Gere fails though in his role either. He does offer some entertainment through his method of just throwing himself into every scene for better or worse. This technique is a two edged sword as it does mean he is one of the bright spots of the film as he does go in all or nothing, but this also is what makes him maybe go just step too much in various moments during the course of the film when his face might just seem a little too knowing for his own good. A mixed bag for sure but I will credit Gere for giving his all even if that might not have been quite enough and just a little too much at same time. 

Read More

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Robin Williams in Insomnia

Robin Williams did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Walter Finch in Insomnia.

Insomnia is about a homicide detective under investigation by internal affairs Will Dormer (Al Pacino) who is sent to Alaska to investigate the murder of a local teen while he plagued by guilt and the inability to sleep due to the midnight sun. It's an effective thriller even though it unfortunately has Hillary Swank in it who should only be cast in very rare circumstances. 

In 2002 Robin Williams rejected his standard on screen persona with his startling but sympathetic turn in One Hour Photo and in Insomnia. Williams again is playing against his usual type once again, and like One Hour Photo he does not even give a hint of his comedic work. As with many films where the killer is a mystery at least at first, and a famous actor has yet to make his appearance it is fairly safe to assume that he is going to be the killer. Insomnia actually pretty much takes this as a given as the first we even know of Williams it is hearing his voice revealing that he is the killer to Pacino's character. This actually is a pretty interesting way to introduce the character that might have not worked if it wasn't Williams's familiar voice over the phone.

Even though it is only his voice Williams makes a strong impact to begin with with his eerily calm delivery as he speaks. Finch isn't calling Dormer to turn himself in nor is he calling in the often used villain calling the hero routine but rather to make a deal as Finch was a witness to Dormer shooting and killing his partner. William's performance is very interesting in that even his voice is strangely calm there is nothing overtly evil about it either. He finds such startling tone for just his manner in which Finch talks that instantly makes him a fascinating character before we have even met him as Williams opens up with a mystery of this man only leaving us to what to know exactly what is behind the man who speaks in such a gentle way about his murder.

When Dormer finally meets Finch face to face Williams does not disappoint. His Finch is very different from his Sy in One Hour Photo even though it might seem like Williams might tread a little water in his performance but he does not. As Finch there is not anything that would make you instantly pinpoint him as a murderer at least in his style. He is again technically a lonely man, but in this case a very different sort of lonely man. Unlike in his leading work from this year Williams portrays the man who is all alone with a great degree of contentment most of the time. Williams doesn't make Finch seem desperate in any way, and part of what makes this performance so effective is that Williams does not plays Finch as the aggressive killer instead creates a more complex portrait.

When Finch lays out his plans to Dormer which involve framing somewhat else for the murder there is something so strange yet absolutely brilliant about Williams's performance. Everything that Finch lays out he words so nicely and puts it together like a set of plot points they both need to follow to make sure that they both escape any judgment. Why this is brilliant is that Finch himself is a mystery writer and Williams does two things by taking this approach. Firstly he shows that Finch has a certain ego in his writing so much that he will even keep using the writer's lingo and keep a distance even though he is the killer. Secondly though he suggests the way Finch has become since the murder and although it is his very first and now that he can view himself away from it that he could very easily become a serial killer due to his changed nature.

A particularly interesting thing that Williams does here is dominate his scenes with Pacino even though Dormer is the far more volatile one of the two. What Williams does though is basically create the dominance through an odd complacency. As they set up the plan Finch always urges on Dormer one way or another to follow his plan exactly. Williams does this with this odd charisma as even when he is insulted he barely bats an eye always gently pushing his ideas over Dormer's objections. There is also something else there as Finch consistently praises Dormer and his profession as well as trying to convince Dormer to go along with him as a way to do the right thing. Williams is amazing because it is impossible to tell whether he is being genuine in this praise and it comes off as just the easiest way for Finch to control Dormer all the more.

Williams's very best scene is when he tells Dormer about what exactly happened when he killed the girl. Williams lets go ever so slightly of the writer making his own story in this scene, although only ever so slightly. It is a very strange scene but testament to how good Williams is here as he makes you actually sympathize with Finch even though all he is doing is admitting he killed the girl. Again there is something else though as Williams brings just the smallest hint of a seething emotion under neath Finch's almost cherub like smile, and lets onto to where the extreme hatred came from that came when he killed the girl. This scene is incredible moment for Williams because even as he makes Finch seem like a man who did kill by accident what he actually is doing at the same time is showing how Finch is truly reprehensible as he has become a man who can completely rationalize his brutal murder. 

I think Robin Williams probably should contractually obligated to play a potential psychopath as he quite good at it, and it is quite an achievement that he doesn't repeat himself at all in his two portrayals of that sort from 2002. Williams pretty much makes every move you would not expect from Robin Williams playing a psychopathic murderer. In that he downplays everything evil about his character even though it is something that always within his characterization nevertheless. One of my favorite scenes that I think sums up the effectiveness of Williams's performance is late in the film as he and Dormer seem to have fixed everything up just right for themselves. Finch once again plays the nice man saying everything Dormer did was the right thing to do, and Williams is able to be honest with this sentiment even while he actually is not. That dynamic though makes Walter Finch such a chilling character though when he says that he will wrap everything up. Williams in his face gives the face of a man just giving a little bit of comfort, but in his eyes he is man who leaves the possibility that this wrap up probably will mean at least writing just one more murder in to end his story.

Read More

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Dennis Quaid in Far From Heaven

Dennis Quaid did not receive an Oscar nomination, despite being nominated for a Golden Globe, a Sag, and being nominated for and winning several critic awards including the NYFCC, for portraying Frank Whitaker in Far From Heaven.

Far From Heaven is an interesting experiment at recreating the look and feel of a 50's melodrama although it deals directly with its topics rather than alluding to them. The only problem with this for me is that I never really cared for 50's melodramas, and as well I think it missteps somewhat in its partial attempt to replicate the style of the performances in that era.

Dennis Quaid actually has nothing really to do with the style found in some of the other performances in the film and pretty much tries for a realistic approach in his character. Quaid plays Frank the husband of Julianne Moore's Cathy Whitaker and the father of the children. They seem the ideal enough suburban household of the fifties except there is a severe problem in that Frank is a repressed homosexual who early on the film secretly attempts to find liaisons for himself which most often result in him being caught. Unlike many portrayals of gay characters Quaid in no way uses any mannerisms in his portrayal which makes absolute sense because he is playing someone who on the surface should at least seem just like any normal family man from the period. 

Although I know many love this performance I do not have quite the same appreciation for it as I feel Quaid's role is used as more of a plot point to Moore's central storyline muting the impact of Quaid's work somewhat. This is not at all Quaid's fault but it does set some limitations to his portrayal making his character not nearly as interesting as he could have been. What we see of Frank are really glimpses of his moments. We never really see the details, and no I don't mean the sex scenes. What I mean is we see the beginning and the end only of each part of his story. We see him look for liaisons, but then instantly only see the result of them. We see him hear about the therapy but we see none of it. We see him go back to his old ways at the end, but then we instantly see him having accepted himself fully.

What Quaid is left with are the glimpses of the man rather than the whole, but to Quiad's credit I did want to see the whole instead. Quaid is effective in the glimpses. In any of his scenes seeking liaisons they are almost entirely silent which Quaid works well with. Quaid always supports that Frank is a man of the time still no matter what, and even as he is doing something looked very much down upon he will still fulfill his role. Quaid is very good in this as Frank does keep himself within his structures even as he is breaking them, and Quaid leaves the desires in Frank subtle but known. Quaid brings across the repression with the right internalized intensity. Even when Frank seems the ideal man Quaid has the other element always present, but often only there if you look closely.

Quaid's work ends up being really episodic because we don't get the transitions instead we get the results.  Credit goes to Quaid though for realizing each of these moments the best he can and firmly in the character of Frank. Even when he laments his existence where he fights his repression with alcohol Quaid even as he breaks down still keeps that repression even within the scene. It is an interesting scenes as Quaid portrays Frank fighting against himself during the whole time, and leaving himself as nothing more than a bit of a confused mess. Due keeping the character always in this framework it is utterly fitting in the scene where Frank becomes angry over the rumors of Cathy's relationship with the black gardener as again Quaid shows Frank always keeping his role even if he hates that role.

This is a strong piece of work by Dennis Quaid in his creation of Frank, and it only helps that he doesn't go for any of the over the top moments so often in equivalent characters from the 50's. I do have my reservations in that I do think this could have been something absolutely incredible even Frank received much more focus and his arc consisted of more than just the base and then the peak in terms of every point of his story. I won't blame Quaid as that has absolutely nothing to do with him, instead I will credit him in giving striking portrait of Frank even within the sometimes extreme limitations put upon him, and I do believe that Quaid only would have been better if there was more material for him as he excels with what he has.

Read More

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Bernard Hill in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

Bernard Hill did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying King Théoden in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.

I found when re-watching the Lord of the Rings trilogy that the first two films have one character each whose performance I really took for granted the first time I watched the films, but I have come to really appreciate for the depth they bring to their parts. The first film had Sean Bean as Boromir who turned what could have been just a one note bully to a tragic portrait of patriot brought down by his own devotion to his country. The third film perhaps could have had a performance like this in John Noble's Denethor, but the writing of the character and Noble's performance really leave a lot to be desired. I have to admit now that I made a mistake listing Noble far too high in my ranking for the supporting actors of 2003 as I wrongfully blamed only the writing, but really Noble is all over the place in his characterization and really overplays his role.

Now how about the second film though. The second film follows the very strings of the story, but the one that actually gets the most focus depicts Aragorn (Viggo Mortensen), Gimli (John Rhys-Davies), and Legolas (Orlando Bloom) as they attempt to help the human kingdom of Rohan fight against the evil hordes of Orcs brought down upon them by the evil wizard Saruman (Christopher Lee). A central figure in this story is that of the King of Rohan Théoden. Although to be sure he isn't at first when he is a slightly moving corpse who basically just gives out orders to make it so his own kingdom will fail since he is under the control of Saruman. Hill does not have much to do in these brief scenes for sure, but he certainly gets his chance to shine once Théoden regains control of himself.

When a King is a supporting character in a film they often are rather simplistic characters either being just kind of simple higher up good guys or bad guys. Bernard Hill deserve a great deal of credit for really making an honest character out of Théoden not just a place holder for power. Hill's work is one that I only appreciate more on additional viewings of this film as he brings so much to this part. What Hill does in the part is create the King as a real man, and what really what there is to the King as whole. When he regains his power it is a great scene for Hill as he goes from the living corpse to the King once more. It is a great scene because Hill naturally infuses into the part the inner strength and really the majesty there should be within a great King.

Of course immediately after that scene where Hill set up the strength of the King the tone quickly changes when Théoden asks to see his son who has recently been killed. Hill has a difficult scene as we did not know the son in any way and we just met Théoden so it very well could have fallen flat, but Hill absolutely delivers in the scene importantly bringing a great humanity to his role. It is a incredible scene not only due to Hill's heartbreaking reaction as he grieves over the death of his son, but as well in this brings a great deal of emotional weight to what will come through Hill's portrayal of Théoden feelings toward the conflict as the whole. There is such a haunting quality Hill brings as he regrets being the one who lives as the young dies and the world around him seems to be turning to darkness.

Hill continues to excel in the role by bringing depth to the part that very easily could have been overlooked. When Théoden makes his decision for his people to whole in the fortification of Helm's Deep this is not a decision that is just there to make the plot move forward rather Hill offers far more in the part realizing the duties of the King in his portrayal. These are not just skimmed over in an improper fashion by Hill he brings a great deal of heart in his performance and Hill always shows the devotion in Théoden to the welfare of his people. There is never a moment where the idea of being the King is that of just being a man of power to have power, what Hill really brings to life is the idea of the responsibility of the power, and Hill expresses this through his portrayal which is commanding yet always carries a certain empathy as well.

When Hill is the most important is in the central set piece of the film which is the battle of Helm's deep. With Mortensen needing to play the role of pretty much the leading action star and Bloom and Rhys-Davies being the killing machine comic reliefs it leaves Hill to be the one to to express what the battle really means throughout its course. Where as soon as the battle begins the others stay fairly consistent in manner Hill is excellent as he portrays the experience of the King in his battle that will either save or destroy his Kingdom. Hill is spellbinding in a scene just before the battle as Théoden asks one of his men if he will follow him to whatever end the battle might bring. Hill's expression conveys the heavy burden responsibility in Théoden, a doubt if he is worthy of such loyalty, and the fear of what may come from his leadership.

As the battle proceeds Hill acts as the face of the reality of the situation and is very effective as his honest portrayal of what the King goes through the experience of the decisive battle. At first with the hesitations but he moves toward confidence as it seems the battle is in his favor. This does not last long though as the battle continues. Hill in every act of battle allows us to see the seriousness of the situation even as the others are jumping head first into crowds of enemies or surf boarding shields. Hill makes Théoden always brings the power alive and makes it more than just a series of action scenes. He always brings the meaning to the moments and is especially powerful at the end of the battle as Hill shows the way the length of the fight has worn down Théoden. This makes it all the more inspiring as Théoden makes one last charge against the enemy. It is an amazing scene for Hill as he brings out the final strength of the King as he makes one final attempt to personally save his people.

I suppose I am committing some serious blasphemy when I say that Andy Serkis's performance as Gollum is not my favorite performance in this film, but even though I like that performance my favorite performance in that film and my favorite of the whole trilogy actually is Hill's portrayal of King Théoden. I just love this portrayal of a character that could have been so easily just brushed aside or been just a pretty unremarkable character. Bernard Hill gives a great performance that doesn't simply any aspect of his performance making Théoden a fully fleshed character and a remarkable look into the mind of this King. Hill brings a true poignancy in his performance giving the gravitas needed for each of his scenes, and his delivery of Théoden's speeches are some of the best moments in the film.

Read More

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002: Andy Serkis in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers

Andy Serkis did not receive an Oscar nomination for portraying Gollum/Smeagol in The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers.

The Two Towers is the strong follow up to Fellowship of the Rings that basically depicts the separate journeys of the Fellowship members after they have disbanded.

Ah this performance one very often cited as an Academy oversight, although it was unlikely going to happen when the academy no doubt had a hard time understanding the idea of a motion capture performance, or at least refusal to recognize along with purely live action work. This was not just the academy's fault either though as the BFCA rewarded Serkis, but only after separating into a digital performance category where he was nominated along with Dobby and Yoda. BAFTA probably should have been ashamed though since they did not nominate Serkis here despite the fact that they nominated Eddie Murphy for his vocal performance in Shrek just a year earlier.

Well anyway what is there to a motion capture performance anyway? Obviously the voice work all belongs to Serkis that is a given, but then comes the controversy. Some, who probably haven't done a great deal of research in the matter, think it is all the computers and the animators at work. Of course then there is another party that pretty much says it is all Serkis which in itself is just a bit of an overstatement, but its true that the motion capture also allowed Serkis to portray what Gollum does in his face and in his physical movements. The reason I say its a bit of an overstatement though is if it was just Serkis in make up his eyes would not be nearly as large or quite as expressive, and digital artists did contribute to the character as well.

In some ways though this is a form of a very advance make up, and just as make up can aid an actor performance in some way this makes Gollum more of an otherworldly creature than he would have been if Serkis had just been covered in make up instead. Getting that rather heavy baggage out of the way how about I get to the actual performance now. Serkis plays Gollum the creature who has become warped from being the previous bearer of the evil ring of power which is now in the possession of Frodo (Elijah Wood) who wishes to destroy by going through the difficult path to Mordor along with his friend Sam (Sean Astin). Gollum appears the first time as he tries to steal the ring from them, but is quickly caught instead.

Much of what is important about Serkis's performance is his creation of Gollum as a character, and the split personality disorder that he clearly suffers from with the oppressive evil Gollum and the meek sympathetic Smeagol. Serkis is particularly impressive early on when the personalities come in and out almost at random. Serkis is effective in portraying the differences of the sides with the viciousness of his expressive and violent voice as Gollum balanced against the timid expression and the soft voice of Smeagol. What's most impressive is early on how Serkis comes in and out of the personalities randomly yet with a natural flow that makes Gollum's disorder particularly effective in both suggesting what the ring has done to him, but as well setting the tone for his character. 

Gollum ends up with a strange role as he is always a villain of sorts as he wants to steal the ring yet he ends up acting as the guide and almost the guardian to Frodo at the same. It would have been very easy to have gotten Gollum wrong making him too much of a joke, or just a one note creature. Serkis though honestly develops a character with Gollum and makes him the strange, but interesting presence he should be. He finds the right mix of the character from being the blunt guide of information, the sometimes even comic companion, but as well the volatile personality in which you can't quite know what to expect from him and stands as a threat even when it seems like he is trying to help. 

The transition Gollum has through the film actually is fairly blunt one in that the Smeagol personality takes over for quite some time in the film therefore Serkis stays with that character for some time until abuse causes the Gollum personality to come back. The major change is in the Smeagol personality and Serkis is very effective in his portrayal of Smeagol's take over as he finds the strength to overcome his weaknesses, but as well his later manner when he goes back to be subservient to the Gollum personality. His transition is relatively simple but Serkis handles it very well by being convincing through its entirety bringing Gollum naturally to the point of being a full on villain by the end of the film.

This obviously is not a traditional performance in a whole lot of ways, but Serkis should be given a great deal of credit for his memorable portrayal. He makes Gollum a unique creature through his distinct yet always natural feeling facial and physical manner as well as his voice that is just perfect in separating Gollum from all the other creatures found in the film. More than that though Serkis actually brings the right complexity in the part, and manages to mediate the different roles which Gollum fills in film with a terrific consistency. With a part that could have been completely obnoxious, or could have come off at quite a distant character due to the computer generated nature of the character Serkis achieves something rather special as he makes Gollum one of the most compelling characters in the film.

Read More

Alternate Best Supporting Actor 2002

And the Nominees Were Not:

Andy Serkis in The Two Towers

Bernard Hill in The Two Towers

Dennis Quaid in Far From Heaven

Robin Williams in Insomnia

Richard Gere in Chicago

Read More