It shouldn't be the case that for Hawkes to have a nomination, Hunt should lose hers. They were both stellar performances.
www.paynebyname.com
It isn't that Hunt should lose hers for Hawkes to have one. Hawkes deserved one, whereas I do not believe Hunt did.
shareThey were both very good. The more I see of this Hawkes guy the more impressed I am by him.
What we have here is failure to communicate!share
Yes, sadly it seems that one of the many ways in order to secure an Oscar nom is to either star in a Holocaust movie (Schindlers List, Sophie's Choice, Inglorious Basterds), play a real person (Lincoln, Bob Dylan, Maggie Thatcher), play someone with severe mental or physical disabilities (I Am Sam, Forrest Gump, My Left Foot) or, if you're a woman, appear fully nude (Monsters Ball, The Sessions, Boogie Nights)
Ashmi any question
[deleted]
Should have been nominated, and although Hugh Jackman was great, he should have been left out.
Daniel Day Lewis - Lincoln
Denzel Washington - Flight
Joaquin Phoenix - The Master
John Hawkes - The Sessions
Bradley Cooper - Silver Lining Playbook
And I agree Hawkes reminds me a LOT like Michael Shannon. Every movie they're in they give great, underrated performances.
John Hawkes should have been nominated, yes.
One of my pet peeves is someone being nominated in the supporting category, when their role was a lead. That is what happened to Helen Hunt for this movie. The role of Cheryl was a lead. That was not a supporting role, the movie would not exist without it.
Her nomination was deserved, the movie would not have worked at all if either performance was lacking.
They both deserved nominations. I just saw this beautiful, moving film and I'm stunned it's sole Oscar nom was for Helen. She certainly deserved it but Hawkes gave a performance far superior to many actual Best Actor Oscar winners in the past decade and the film and screenplay also deserved nominations.
share