Acting Awards Snubbing Comedic Actors?
Guy Lodge from In Contention recently made a case for Emma Stone to get consideration for the Best Actress category for her superb performance in Easy A. Her character was strong, complex and funny and the movie demonstrated that audiences are willing to turn up to watch a female-centric journey. Although the odds of Stone actually getting any kind of traction appear slim at best, it is worth wondering why comedic performances have been consistently slighted by the Academy over the years.
For some reason, it has become somewhat of a common belief in the last 20 or 30 years that comedy is a lower form of narrative art than drama. It is no secret that virtually all the acting awards and nominations go to actors playing flashy dramatic roles and every year, critics (and bloggers) collectively oooh and aaah about these bombastic performances in an endless echo — you know who you are! However, one has to wonder why flashy dramatic performances are widely believed to be superior to a fluffy comic turn or an understated dramatic portrayal. Is a seemingly effortless yet highly demanding turn like Amy Adams’ in Disney’s Enchanted being completely overlooked simply because it is too fluffy?
Aside from the well-known fact that acting awards usually do not reward the best performances anyway, some possible explanations for why comedic actors are generally slighted:
- Western audiences are conditioned to enjoy flashy and bombastic dramatic performances, such as Daniel Day Lewis’ in There Will Be Blood, over more subtle or seemingly “effortless” portrayals.
- Giving a good performance in a great movie is harder and hence more deserving of recognition than shining in a mediocre/good movie
- Comedic actors are generally less talented than dramatic actors
- Comedies are generally not as good, serious and important as dramas
- Drama is harder than comedy
- Other explanation (comments)
26 Comments
Guilty!
I think drama is a lot more… er, revered as art above comedy because we feel the need to award the actor for suffering. Especially actresses who are pretty… they decide to get a salary cut to be on this indie, in which they need to be “ugly” – we (the people) feel like it’s a tough job, that they suffer for their art, so we must reward them.
Sometimes it doesn’t work… *cough*JaredLeto*cough* but more often than not, we feel they are doing something we, normal people, wouldn’t be able to do… or wouldn’t dare to do. It’s like being naked on screen… in a comedy, naked women is for laughs.. or ogling at them. In a drama, naked “actress” is for serious drama… and it “serves” the plot/character.
Sometimes we forget how difficult it is to make people laugh… but I guess comedy it’s in the eye of the beholder. What one part think it’s funny, the other one doesn’t – drama is more… general. What makes me cry/mad, can make you cry/mad… but if it doesn’t, you will at least think “it’s kind of saddening/maddening”.
Ellen Page on Juno was fluffy, right? I liked Juno a lot, but a lot of people hated it. But then, there’s a lot of people saying Marion Cotillard didn’t deserve her win – but I completely disagree.
Even thinking that Cotillard didn’t deserve her win is nothing but blasphemy in my book.
Love the Leto reference, too. He risked so much, and got pretty much nothing out of it.
Right? I keep telling the Ellen Page fans, even though I’m a fan, that Cotillard was nothing short of brilliant. Despite the language barrier. Not understanding French… or the Swedish subs – it still moved me.
I must admit that I haven’t seen Leto’s film, so I can’t tell you whether he was good or not, but people made a lot of fuzz about it, then he blew the chances with all the gossip “buzz” and Lindsay (she was in it, right?) – the film just became marketing poison… and went poof. Have never even seen it as a rerun on TV, now that I think about it.
Not gonna lie, I couldn’t finish La Vie En Rose… Cottilard was outstanding and really pulled off all the stops but the movie itself… ugh
LOL yeah, the first time I saw the film – I didn’t know what was going on half the time. It had a lot of issues with script, and editing… and well, directing.
But the fact that Cotillard’s performance grabbed me not with the dialog, but with her emotions – blown away! xD
While I agree, Emma Stone did a fantastic job in the film, let’s be serious. Parroting one-liners in a caricatured high school setting requires nowhere near the talent a dramatic role requires. Can you seriously imagine Emma Stone in a role like Mariane Pearl in A Mighty Heart, or Halle Berry’s character’s role in Monster’s Ball? Those aren’t even exceptional examples. If a truly poignant comedy came along, encouraging true introspection, the actors should be considered for their roles, but a high school comedy about quasi-prostitution? It has no place in a ceremony of awards reserved for the very best of what film as art has to offer.
I’m not talking about Emma Stone in particular, but performances in comedies, romantic-comedies or other commercial fares in general. Also, I think you are somewhat underestimating the difficulty of being a good comedian. The reverse of what your example is also true, would Halle Berry or Mariane Pearl been half as good as an Emma Stone in Easy A (theoretically speaking). Anyone picked off the street and given a minimal amount of training can be a half-decent dramatic performer but comedic talent is much more instinctive and an innate talent.
Touche. And for the sake of full disclosure, I was a bit sauced when I so passionately commented.
“Comedy is the most difficult art to perform in” is what one of my former drama teachers told us when I was still in high school. While there are obviously exceptions to this rule, I think that she was right.
While I don’t exactly think that Stone’s performance is Oscar worthy, it does help bring up the debate of whether comedic performances are overlooked. I’m still shocked that the Academy recognized Downey Jr. for his Tropic Thunder performance, especially considering how the rest of the film panned out.
What it all comes down to is how challenging the role actually was and the message that it was able to send. I really don’t think that most actresses Stone’s age could’ve pulled that performance off. Oscar? No. Recognition of a probable star being born? Yes.
I agree with your former drama teacher, I think the notion that ‘comedy is a lower form of narrative art than drama’ is absurd. I’m not an actor but I’d think being believably funny AND engaging is as much an art form as those putting out a dramatic performance. And yes to Castor’s comment that comedy is harder to ‘train’ on IMO, it’s almost the case of either you got it or you don’t. Great article Castor!
Yes Ruth, I also disagree (obviously?). If anything, comedy is a higher form than drama. There is much less room for error, you are either funny or you are not!
Nice article. Man, I gotta see “Easy A.” All I know is if Johnny Depp couldn’t get the Oscar for the first “Pirates of the Caribbean”, it’s a hopeless cause.
Thanks Nicholas, you definitely need to see Easy A although you probably could wait for the DVD out in a few weeks!
This isn’t anything new. Charlie Chaplin’s only Oscar “win” came for Best Music in the 60′s, losing his only Actor nomination (Great Dictator) to James Stewart as, what is generally perceived, an apology for not getting on last year (on Stewart’s part, not Chaplins). Buster Keaton – never nominated for an Oscar.
Peter Sellers is a bit of an outcast with 3 Oscar nominations (2 for acting – in his more dramatic/satire films Being There and Dr. Strangelove) but no wins. Robin Williams, Red Buttons, and Jamie Foxx proved a comedian doing drama can earn a win if you pick a sentimental enough role and nail it (Mo’Nique showed you just need to connect with a great role).
Personally I’m torn as to how much I’m willing to invest in comedians. Great comedy suffers from not only being seen as a popcorn art (much like Action films), but also from a greater sense of personal perspective. It’s a lot easier for us to recognize a good display of emotion, rather than for all of us to recognize the great delivery of a joke (let alone the argument as to whether or not we all think that joke was particularly funny).
This is one category of film I believe will always be subject to some debate. Though I must admit it’s a fun one
I don’t think there is any difference between a comedy, a drama or an action film. Every film deals with one single common aspect: identity. How can this movie teach me something about myself. When it comes to how good a performance is, the great ones aren’t about the delivery of a joke or how good looking the actor is, but rather how easy it is for the audience to relate to the character the actor is playing.
I don’t deny that, but I say that in order to be a strong, well carried, actor in a comedy you must be able to deliver punchlines with extreme precision. As a society we watch this, laugh (to varying degrees), and eagerly await for the next punchline. There’s always a sense of waiting and anticipation of a joke, a single attribute of the movie. Sure we care about the characters, their journey, and what happens to them. But that’s only in so far as we care how it leads to the next joke. With comedy’s there is a pre-conceived expectation of humor that supersedes the drama. I say most comedies, take last year’s The Hangover, where that element of film making is on display.
However, there are comedies that manage to present laughs while balancing the drama. I think Plains, Trains, and Automobiles is a great example of a film that’s funny, but draws you in to care about the characters.
They’re not strictly comedy, and because of that we find equal appreciation in their plight and humor.
You could say the same about horror film too. Too many great horror movies and performances are overlooked.
The Academy nominated Kidman for Moulin Rouge, and didn’t even bother with The Others, right?
Others was arguably the harder performance.
Comedy is harder, my dear Castor. And the Academy is full of people who are forever stuck in their ways, and play right into the bait.
But why must we measure talent on whether or not someone has an Oscar? It means nothing.
Ripley, you’re on to something. There are so many actors who haven’t even gotten a major nomination who I think are far more talented than those who’ve won.
You damn right Ripley! We all know the best actor/performance often do not receive the Oscar (or even a nomination) and that there is all kind of behind-the-scene politics and considerations…
It makes the Oscars harder to watch every year.
I know this isn’t the proper place to brin it up, but for the last week, my blog page keep directing over to ads. I’ve tried taking down any videos or pictures that might be bugged, but it’s still going on. So…does anyone know what’s going on and/or how to fix it?
Remove all 3rd party widget and see which is the culprit. I’m pretty sure it’s the Feedburner widget in “This is My Happy Face” which is corrupted.
Comedy, like writing looks easy. Everyone thinks they can be funny, just like everyone thinks they can act. But when really good comic actors do their jobs well, it looks easy and therefore it is not taken seriously.
Trackbacks