Where we stand: Best Actor in a Leading Role

Following up on my previous post, I figured it's about time I go and take a look at the various Oscar races, starting with none other than Best Actor. With no clear front runners, and with the closest things to front runners barely seen or not seen at all, it's a tricky race. Let's see what we can think of...

Let's start with performances that have already been released, shall we? Hm, not an incredible bunch, though there is some strong work here, and we shouldn't be surprised if one or more of these men is a nominee...but WHO??? First, there's Sam Rockwell in "Moon", who is currently my win for Best Actor, and has picked up one or two obscure awards. It's certainly a good performance, at times verging on a great one, and Rockwell has to carry the whole movie on his shoulders, which he does well. If given a proper campaign he could be the major indie player in the best actor race. He also plays two roles in the film and shares most of the film...with himself, which seems like something that would go over well with the Academy. It's an expressive role that doesn't quite delve into histrionics and and even better, he has no internal competition, supporting or otherwise. The big hurdle for Rockwell however, is exposure. A campaign is critical, and if it doesn't happen, Rockwell's performance could be lost in the dust.
Then there's Jeremy Renner in my still-number-1-of-the-year, "The Hurt Locker". What Renner's performance has that could hinder him is naturalism. Bigelow's film is a grounded, naturalistic one, and Renner's performance fits into the film beautifully. The scenes he has with his son in the film are beautifully subdued and balance out his scenes as the reckless soldier. Unfortunately, with so many showy roles on the way, Renner could be left behind simply because the performance isn't big enough. Unless. Unless the Academy really gives some serious loving to Bigelow's film and Renner gets swept along.
Next up to bat, Joseph Gordon-Levitt in "(500) Days of Summer". This one is especially strange. If the Academy decides to nominate a much lighter role, he could be the perfect vessel. As for the performance itself, it's very good, and Levitt certainly makes a bigger impact than his co-star because the film focuses on Tom's ups and downs. Levitt gets to be both dour and delightful (he hit the dance scene out of the park), but can the performance really attract awards of any kind? While a Golden Globe nod isn't too far a stretch (seeing as there's a comedy/musical category) at the moment his chances aren't too good. But you never know, this could be the year the Academy wants to honor a more fun performance. And besides, Levitt is a very talented actor who has gone totally unrecognized in a slew of indie projects, and he's bound to get at least nominated some day...just perhaps not this year.
Let's talk about Johnny Depp. Audiences certainly adore him, and recently the Academy has too. In fact...pretty much ONLY in recent years has the Academy warmed up to him. Though he received plenty of Golden Globe nominations in the 1990s, Depp didn't receive an Oscar nod until awards season 03-04, and it was for a film that wasn't the least bit traditional Oscar bait...quite the opposite ("Pirates of the Caribbean"). But now Depp isn't playing a pirate or a writer or a singing murderous barber; he's playing a gangster. Honestly, I did like Depp in "Public Enemies". It was nice to see him in a role where there was no way for him to twist the character into a variation of Capt. Jack Sparrow. He was quiet, intriguing, and had good chemistry with Marion Cotillard, and toward the end he has some affecting, but not overwhelming, scenes that are what I like to call "Oscar-clip scenes". But can he get in? Reception for the film was good, albeit a bit underwhelmed, and with so many other contenders, the Academy may not feel the need to give Depp a chance.
Lastly for this installment (it's getting late, so we'll finish this in a new post tomorrow), "A Serious Man"'s Michael Stuhlbarg. The performance is certainly very good, but the film is so small that Stuhlbarg could easily just get trampled unless he gets some "serious" help from critics and precursors. What I like most about Stuhlbarg is that even though his is a reactionary role, he still gives the character life (as opposed to, say...Benjamin Button, who just kind of stood there when life happened). Even then, the nomination is an unlikely one. Like Renner, Stuhlbarg only has a good chance if the Academy goes crazy over his film, and if one or more of the unreleased performances disappoints in a BIG way.

That's all for now, check back over the next few days for the second half of the Best Actor race, as well as the races for Actress, Supporting Actor, and Supporting Actress. And remember folks, as indepth as predictions can become, and as crazy as things can (and will) get, all that matters in the end is the name that's on that carefully guarded envelope.