Inferior to Pacino, Hoffman, and Nicholson. - Harry and Tonto (1974) Discussion

[–] kawaru1973 9 years ago

This is one of the big criticisms of award ceremonies and the Oscars in particular.
Unlike some I have seen this film and as good as his performance is Carney is at best the bronze medal winner in this situation.

It's a rather obvious case of the award being given as a "thank you for your career so far" at the expense of actors who turned in better performances that year.

Isn't this what lifetime achievement awards are for?

reply

[–] baran_erik 8 years ago

He was only 55, why would they be treating him as if he was about to die?

Life is pain. Anyone who says differently is selling something.

reply

[–] geode 9 years ago

I wonder how on Earth Carney would win an Oscar against three men that did superior performances.

By giving the best performance? I have thought so since seeing this back in 1974. It is more subtle, and I like that.

Oh Lord, you gave them eyes but they cannot see...

reply

[–] greatstreetwarrior 8 years ago

dont forget the great performance of Albert Finney which too was nominated.

reply

[–] TongueFu 8 years ago

The American public had grown to love Art Carney because of his inimitable performances as Ed Norton on the Honeymooners. That sort of comic genius tends to leave an indelible impression that won't soon be forgotten and that, thankfully, can be revisited via reruns and today's media outlets such as YouTube. People in the acting profession loved working with Art Carney and admired him just as much as the viewing public. I think all that love and admiration played into his winning the Oscar. Besides that, all those other nominees were going to have future opportunities to vie for the Oscar. I think the Academy voters knew in their hearts that this might be the only plum lead acting role Art Carney was likely to get no matter how many more years he would be active in the profession and they wanted to reward him for all the laughter he had brought them and American audiences over his career. So, in that respect, maybe it was more of a lifetime achievement award - and a richly deserved one.

reply

[–] franzkabuki 8 years ago

And Hackman. I think Carney also bettered himself a few years down the line in The Late Show. He's really too consistently nice and somewhat uncomplicated here.

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

reply

[–] deontee2002 8 years ago

I agree; Carney is great in The Late Show, and should have been Oscar nominated.

reply

[–] Owlwise (1536) 3 years ago

Different from Pacino, Hoffman, and Nicholson. But not inferior. Quieter, more reflective, which doesn't light up the screen the way those other performances do, but stays with the viewer for a longtime afterwards.

reply

[–] BillHicksFan (10653) 2 years ago

He was better.

reply

[–] roger1 (3834) 8 months ago

Though the Oscar winners are always "a matter of opinion" rather than provable fact like "who won the 100 yard dash?", the dynamics are often there to see in retrospect.

Art Carney's performance was fine. So he was eligible for that. He carries the movie. So he was eliegible for that. And as Oscar winner Jack Palance said(and I think this IS key): "The Oscar isn't for the acting. Its for the CHARACTER." But here, Pacino and Nicholson and Hoffman AND Carney ALL played great characters.

So Carney's win was for: (1) Lifetime achievement -- which included his stint on The Honeymooners but ALSO included his losing the movie of The Odd Couple(where he had played Felix Unger to Walter Matthau's Oscar Madison on Broadway) to Jack Lemmon and (2) because he might never get such a great role again(it was intended to bring James Cagney out of retirement) and (3) VERY important -- the other guys were young and would "surely" get future chances to win Oscars. Nicholson won the very next year(for Cuckoo's Nest) and then won two more. Hoffman won in 1979(for Kramer vs Kramer) and then again for Rain Man(1988.) And poor ol' Al Pacino had to wait almost 20 more years to FINALLY win for Scent of a Woman "Hoo-ah."

So everything worked out in the end. Carney, Nicholson, Hoffman and Pacino all won Best Actor Oscars(one for Carney, one for Pacino, two for Nicholson, two for Hoffman) and one Supporting Actor for Nicholson.

For Nicholson and Pacino, Art Carney winning for 1974 was a repeat of the year previous. Jack Lemmon won HIS "Life Achievement Oscar" (for the very depressing Save the Tiger) in the year that Nicholson was nominated for The Last Detail and Pacino was nominated for Serpico.

And yes, again: Jack Lemmon had gotten Art Carney's Broadway "Odd Couple" role for the movies.

reply

[–] BillHicksFan (10653) 8 months ago

[deleted]