Where we Stand: Best Supporting Actor

There have been plenty of fantastic lead performances this decade, but what are leads without good support? Often filled with more colorful, surprising characters, supporting roles have and always will be an essential part of storytelling, whether they border on being co-lead, or only have 10 minutes of screentime. Today we'll take a gander at the men in the running for Best Supporting Actor, 2009:

Recently, Oscar has been rather kind to villains, nominating eerie turns like William Hurt in "A History of Violence", or giving the statue to back to back sure-to-be villain icons, Javier Bardem in "No Country for Old Men" and Heath Ledger in "The Dark Knight". At this point, it wouldn't be a surprise if 2009 continued this trend with one of two men. The first is our current front runner for Best Supporting Actor, Christoph Waltz in "Inglourious Basterds". While not as instantly memorable in his looks (no god-awful haircut, no cracked makeup, etc...) as our past two victorious villains, Waltz' Col. Hans Landa is one of Tarantino's best characters, a figure of sickening charm and disturbing cruelty. Watching him viciously attack a strudel in front of Melanie Laurent is one of the film's, and Waltz's, best moments. It's a deliciously inspired turn, that, at this moment, only has to worry about a fellow evil-doer stealing his thunder.

That potential thunder-stealer is none other than Stanley Tucci for "The Lovely Bones," arriving this month. Initial reviews have be a bit on the mixed side, but Tucci has been earning raves as the pedophile killer of Susie Salmon (Saoirse Ronan). It's easy enough to be put off by the character, but Tucci has one thing that Waltz doesn't: Hollywood veteran status. Many believed Tucci deserved a supporting nomination for "The Devil Wears Prada," and he's earned strong reviews for his turn in "Julie and Julia" (also opposite Meryl Streep). With two roles earning praise, and one of them so close to the end of the year, coupled with Tucci's years of unrewarded experience in cinema, he's one to watch, and in the coming weeks could even surpass Waltz as the front runner.

Third in line for the statue is Alfred Molina, a respected and talented actor who has yet to be nominated (and was badly snubbed for his excellent work in "Frida" (2002)). This year, Molina finds himself in a much better position, with his role in "An Education". Aside from the lead role, Molina gives the second best performance in the film (although Rosamund Pike's facial reactions were pretty hilarious, it must be said). Molina has a less screen time than Waltz, and maybe Tucci, but his role is certainly baity enough. His first rant and his scene near the end where he talks to his daughter through her door will have AMPAS members drooling to recognize him, and deservedly so, at this point.

Mr. Tucci may be a hard working veteran, but he's got nothing on Christopher Plummer, who's been doing work for decades now, and has yet to even earn a nomination. Does he have anything in his favor? Quite a bit. First, veteran status, second, he's playing a real person (Tolstoy), and so far the reviews have been good. And as more time progresses, the more I get the sense that "The Last Station" is going to be a bigger player in awards season than most of us ever imagined. There is a catch, though. There are those who worry that Plummer may be campaigned as supporting, which could come off as category fraud, and may dissuade people from voting for him (if you're going to award a veteran, you better make sure it's done right). Then there's the internal competition from Helen Mirren, who has been earning the bulk of the acting praise. Plummer may finally get the nomination, but I get the feeling that if he wants an Oscar, he can't let "The Last Station" be his last film.

Clint Eastwood certainly has a way with his actors, which is the main reason why I see Matt Damon as a solid player in the Supporting Actor race. He'll share a good number of scenes with Morgan Freeman, which should provide for some powerful "acting" moments. Damon has also never been rewarded by AMPAS as an actor (only as a writer) despite some excellent performances ("The Talented Mr. Ripley"). Odds are he won't win, but if AMPAS gets on the Eastwood bandwagon this year, expect him to clinch the nomination.

After those five, the range of likely candidates shrinks considerably, but there are a few left worth mentioning. First is Woody Harrellson in "The Messenger". He's already having a great year with "Zombieland" being a hit, and now he's earning strong praise in the war drama. Another one with veteran status, if the precursors (especially the Globes) reward him with even a nomination, his chances of getting in could skyrocket.

Also coming from the war genre is Anthony Mackie in "The Hurt Locker". Though beautifully natural through most of the film, Mackie also gets the film's one and only "showy" moment of acting, which could boost his chances, especially with the likelihood that "The Hurt Locker" is going to do quite well in awards season (and rightly so).

Zac Efron films usually aren't the ones that go after awards, but this year one of Efron's co-stars might have a slim chance at a nomination. That co-star is Christian McKay in "Me and Orson Welles". As Welles, one of Hollywood's greatest directors/actors/etc..., McKay has earned fantastic reviews. All he really needs at this point is a solid campaign. Chances are he won't win if he gets the nomination, but it would a hell of a way to start off a promising new career.

"Bright Star" may be poised to do well in the next few weeks, but I have serious doubts about Paul Schneider. Though he's earned good reviews, Cornish owned the film, and even she may not be such a sure thing. Unless he makes a strong showing in the right places, expect Schneider's changes to fade quickly.

Oddly enough, people are buzzing about the upcoming "It's Complicated," which surprises the hell out of me. Even stranger is the talk that Alec Baldwin and Meryl Streep could end up as nominees. This wouldn't surprise me so much at, say, the Globes, but the Oscars? Not so fast. Baldwin may be a veteran AND one of the two hosts AND excellent at comedy (as 30Rock reminds us every week), but is the performance really worthy of an award? Meh...

Oh, and Jake Gyllenhaal for "Brothers"? Not happening. Sorry Jake.

My last little paragraph doesn't concern someone who's in the running for the Oscar, but simply should be...but ISN'T. That person is Peter Capaldi from "In the Loop," which is sadly ineligible for the Oscars due to being released ONDemand too close to its theatrical release (or some BS like that). Featuring some of the most fantastic swearing and insults in the entire film, Capaldi's near-constant rage at the idiocy around him is gutbusting to watch, and like the film, he deserves some serious awards love. Let's hope that everyone else gives him the love that Oscar sadly can't.