MovieChat Forums > Dog Day Afternoon (1975) Discussion > best performance by an actor not to win ...

best performance by an actor not to win the Oscar


I consider Pacino's performance in this to be one of the greatest performances not to win the Oscar. Unfortunately he had the bad luck of doing this the same year that One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest won everything (and Jack did deserve it). Anybody agree?

reply

Pacino in "Dog Day Afternoon" is my favorite Pacino performance and my favorite acting performance by any actor ever. That award year was tough, though, because Jack Nicholson was terrific in "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest" (I also consider that Nicholson's best role). It's ridiculous Pacino didn't even win for at least ONE of the Godfather movies.

reply

[deleted]

Ed Norton in Primal Fear, Cuba was good but c'mon not an oscar worthy performance.

It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me.

reply

[deleted]

IMO the best leading leading role performance ever was ed norton's in american history x. not even de niro or pacino or any other great actor can top this

reply

Paul Giamatti - Sideways
Al Pacino - Dog Day Afternoon
Orson Welles - Citizen Kane
Jack Nicholson - About Schmidt

The Times They Are A-Changin'.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Pacino in 'Dog day' - My opinion - the GREATEST performance EVER by any actor. he's not my fave actor, but boy did he blow me away in this movie.

reply

Al Pacino: Godfather Part I & II
Robert De Niro: Taxi Driver, The Deer Hunter
Russel Crowe: A Beautiful Mind
Edward Norton: Primal Fear

reply

Yes, I just mentioned in another thread that this is the film Pacino should have won the Oscar for. CUCKOO'S NEST was a great film and Nicholson was good but Pacino was better.

reply

As i am reading these message boards about 'The Great Oscar Robberies', one thought comes to my mind : 'It's better to deserve something and not getting it than not deserving something and getting it!'-Mark Twain
I think Al Pacino not getting the statuette for The Godfather 2, Scorsese and Kubrick not getting a single Oscar for best direction(although Kubrick got it for special effects for '2001:A Space Odyssey') are some of the most absurd things about the Academy Awards

reply

pacino is known for giving great performances and not receiving the oscar... i mean his only win was for "scent of a woman"... i agree he deserved it but he also deserved it many times prior. but really... who gives a *beep* about the oscars... they're the sympathy vote. i mean this year probably paul giamatti will win for cinderella man although he doesnt deserve it. it is simply for last year's sideways. *beep* the oscars... they're as rigged as the olympics

those that never have any stories of failure, never tried anything

reply

You are correct about Paul Giamatti (even though he did not win this year). He should have been nominated for his brilliant performance in SIDEWAYS.

reply

Definitely Al Pacino in The Godfather: Part II. But speaking of the Julia Roberts win in 2000 for Erin Brockovich, I thought the Oscar should of had went to Laura Linney for her quiet performance in You Can Count on Me -- better than Julia Roberts can ever reach to. There is also Martin Scorcese being robbed for plenty of films, especially Raging Bull -- but I haven't seen Ordinary People yet so I'm afraid to judge.

I would also like to add Julianne Moore for both Far From Heaven and The Hours (which was nominated in the same year). Those were great performances and it's a shame that the Oscars went to mediocore performances such as Nicole Kidman's in The Hours and Catherine Zeta-Jones in Chicago.

Speaking of Kidman and Chicago, it brings around the topic of Renee Zellweger. I really liked Renee Zellweger but she didn't deserve it for Cold Mountain. It should of had went to Patricia Clarkson that year for Pieces of April.

Last and not least, there is also Greg Kinnear for As Good As It Gets. I can't believe that to this day, Cuba Goodings Jr. got the Oscar for Jerry Maguire and look what an actor he turned out to be.

As for Johnny Depp for Pirates of the Caribbean: The Curse of the Black Pearl -- how about not? Sean Penn and Bill Murray for their respective performances in both Mystic River and Lost in Translation were better, but that's my opinion. Oscars are like the critics -- they avoid strange performances like Depp's in "Pirates" but he was rather good in Finding Neverland -- much, much more Oscar-materialized.

reply

Personally I think it's a crying shame that John Wayne didn't win an Academy Award for his performance in "The Searchers". It was the performance of his lifetime, and in my opinion one of the greatest performances ever.
Generally the movie should have been at least nominated as well, but for some reason it wasn't. Which is strange, seeing as it's damn near flawless.

reply

[deleted]

I agree with most that Pacino should have won for The Godfather Part II. But for me I think Peter Sellers for Dr.Strangelove was to me the one that should have won out of any. Its on the top of my list. But as everyone knows the old rule of the Academy "if we're laughing then it's not art". I also feel this rule hurt the chances of Johnny Depp (am I the only one who didn't like the Pirate movie?) getting a nom for movies like Fear and Loathing and Ed Wood. And just for fun, actors that never got nominated I would say Steve Buscemi (I feel he should have got a nom for Trees Lounge, Ghost World, or Fargo.)

reply

Johnny Depp should have been nominated for ED WOOD and for EDWARD SCISSORHANDS.

reply

Ok, now there are two adults who hated Pirates. Yes to Steve for Fargo!

reply

The Academy has proven time and again that they cannot pick out a great movie when they see it. Kubrick went virtually Oscarless throughout his career. 2001 was not even nominated for best picture, and in my opinion, that is the best film ever made. period. Also, Orson Welles did not win for Citizen Kane, which by many is considered the best film ever made. Plus, Orson Welles' A Touch of Evil was not even nominated for best picture. The Academy is obviously a band morons, and yet, I can't wait for the Oscars.

reply

1. Bill Muraay for Lost in Translation (This is just my personal favorite)
2. Ralph Fiennes for Schindler's List


"Tell that stupid mick he just made my list of things to do today..."

reply

I agree, Pacino is a fine actor, really termendous. But so many people mentioning SCARFACE?? Are you SERIOUS!!! A fun movie, no doubt. But the acting in this film is abominable. Pacino does a great job, but he has a weak script and over-the-top counterparts. He nailed the Cuban accent and the rough criminal, but how many times can someone play a bully thug? He has been so type-casted since the 70's when he got REAL roles. Scarface is a fun movie, but NOTHING in that film is worth an award.

I will agree, however, that the academy is all political. They know who they do and do not like. With this in mind, true movie fans shouldn't get upset when quality films and actors get passed up. If its all bull, why are we griping? I say as long as the fans love Pacino and Kubric and all these great movie makers, they will continue to entertain and produce quality material.


By the way, read King's novel "The Shining" and THEN tell me that Kubric's movie was any good... I'm gonna cath a lot of flack for that one ;)

reply

[deleted]

I read the novel of "The Shining" before I saw the movie. I thought the book was great but i hated the ending. It just became so riddiculous. That is the main reason why I enjoyed the film version more. The ending didn't make me go "Whaat?? Come on!!"

reply

Put me down as also not a fan of Kubrick's The Shining. All image and no substance. The preview was better than the movie.

If we all liked the same movie, there'd only be one movie!

reply

To me, Tommy Lee Jones (in albeit a fun, entertaining performance) winning for "The Fugitive" over Ralph Fiennes for "Schindler's List" was equally as shameful as Liam Neeson losing for the same movie, in his case to Tom Hanks in "Philadelphia". While Hanks is a fine actor and his performance was good, the subject matter was rewarded rather than the person who gave the best performance of the year. The third travesty about "List" is that Ben Kinsgley didn't even get NOMINATED!!! Talk about criminal!

Oh, and on a lighter note- since comedic performances are only recognized in the Supporting Actor/Actress categories-, I thought he would be a shoo-in.....but why did the Academy neglect to even nominate Fred Willard in "Best of Show"? He WAS the best in show!

reply

^^THIS!

reply