[Tony B.]

What is the criteria for Best Actor as opposed to Best Supporting Actor?

I thought Bardim, Brolin and Jones all did a fine job. But none were nominated for Best Actor. Is this just a function of screen time?

If yes, does anyone know how much screen time is needed to qualify for Best?

[Peter W.]

Originally Posted by Tony B.

What is the criteria for Best Actor as opposed to Best Supporting Actor?

I thought Bardim, Brolin and Jones all did a fine job. But none were nominated for Best Actor. Is this just a function of screen time?

If yes, does anyone know how much screen time is needed to qualify for Best?

The Best Actor category doesn't apply to No Country For Old Men. The movie version of this story considered an "ensemble cast" with three protagonists with no main protagonist. "Ensemble Cast" is the proper technical term for this movie.
Simcoe had called Llewyln Moss the "false protagonist". I agree with that.
They pull a switch on you giving the Sheriff the final word although he had been largely peripheral to the central life and death struggle going on. (he also had lesser screen time). We expect a relatively good guy, Moss, to be the main character. However you could also argue that Chigurh is the main character. But you can't really come up with one for sure, it's an ensemble cast.
The Coens changed the structure of the book. In the book the Sheriff, although still peripheral to the main struggle was commenting in each chapter.
In the movie he comments only in the beginning and end. In the book you could call him the main protagonist but even that's doesn't quite fit. He's more of a narrator/commentor. A narrator is not the same thing as a protagonist.
He is mainly commenting on events which don't directly involve him. Later, he does enter the situation stepping into the story but he does not change situation at all.
The story is largely about a conflict between two men. Most of the conflict has nothing to do with the Sheriff.
The aspect that concerns him is that he was unable to protect Lleweyln Moss, the man he vowed to protect and this confirms to himself that he is too old to handle these types of situation and he should retitre. A lot of the detail about Moss and the mystical things Chigurh says and many of the things he does have no bearing at all on Sheriff Bell. So it would be silly to call this a story about the retirement of an old man. It's only partly that. It's the story of a life and death conflict between an cocky average guy and a semi mystical evil character and a lawman who incapable of stopping it. One things for sure most of the screen time was not devoted to the Sheriff's inner conflicts. The Coens were more interested in the Chigurh character and he is alot more interesting than a rather generic Sheriff although Tommy Lee is perfect for this sort of thing. But its Bardem who makes the movie.

Originally Posted by simcoe

Certainly they knew as a business decision "Call it, Friend-o"-type scenes are going to sell more tickets than a blabbering crusty old sheriff.

It's about three people. In this situation you only get the supporting actor category.

[simcoe]

Tony,



If you stick around here for even a short while you find the below is a typical Peter response, a long, convoluted diatribe that never gets anywhere near an answer.



The answer to your question is No, its not a function of screen time. Anthony Hopkins won Best Actor in Silence of the Lambs with just 16 minutes of screen time. Certainly one could argue that Bardem had an equally terrifying impact as Hopkins and certainly more than 16 minutes of screen time. I have seen movies where two actors had fairly equal screen time with one being nominated for Best and the other for Supporting. IMO the nominations are more a function politicking, sentiment, and restitution for previous slights, than any "formula".

Originally Posted by Peter W.

The movie version of this story considered an "ensemble cast" with three protagonists with no main protagonist. "Ensemble Cast" is the proper technical term for this movie.
Simcoe had called Llewyln Moss the "false protagonist". I agree with that.
They pull a switch on you giving the Sheriff the final word although he had been largely peripheral to the central life and death struggle going on. (he also had lesser screen time). We expect a relatively good guy, Moss, to be the main character. However you could also argue that Chigurh is the main character. But you can't really come up with one for sure, it's an ensemble cast.
The Coens changed the structure of the book. In the book the Sheriff, although still peripheral to the main struggle was commenting in each chapter.
In the movie he comments only in the beginning and end. In the book you could call him the main protagonist but even that's doesn't quite fit. He's more of a narrator/commentor. A narrator is not the same thing as a protagonist.
He is mainly commenting on events which don't directly involve him. Later, he does enter the situation stepping into the story but he does not change situation at all.
The story is largely about a conflict between two men. Most of the conflict has nothing to do with the Sheriff.
The aspect that concerns him is that he was unable to protect Lleweyln Moss, the man he vowed to protect and this confirms to himself that he is too old to handle these types of situation and he should retitre. A lot of the detail about Moss and the mystical things Chigurh says and many of the things he does have no bearing at all on Sheriff Bell. So it would be silly to call this a story about the retirement of an old man. It's only partly that. It's the story of a life and death conflict between an cocky average guy and a semi mystical evil character and a lawman who incapable of stopping it. One things for sure most of the screen time was not devoted to the Sheriff's inner conflicts. The Coens were more interested in the Chigurh character and he is alot more interesting than a rather generic Sheriff although Tommy Lee is perfect for this sort of thing. But its Bardem who makes the movie.
It's about three people. In this situation you only get the supporting actor category.

[Peter W.]

Originally Posted by simcoe

Tony,



If you stick around here for even a short while you find the below is a typical Peter response, a long, convoluted diatribe that never gets anywhere near an answer.



The answer to your question is No, its not a function of screen time. Anthony Hopkins won Best Actor in Silence of the Lambs with just 16 minutes of screen time. Certainly one could argue that Bardem had an equally terrifying impact as Hopkins and certainly more than 16 minutes of screen time. I have seen movies where two actors had fairly equal screen time with one being nominated for Best and the other for Supporting. IMO the nominations are more a function politicking, sentiment, and restitution for previous slights, than any "formula".

Tony,

If you stick around here for even a short while you find the above is a typical simcoe response, where he avoids the first question about the distinction between Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor and answers the second about screentime "No" in bold print.

Yes who they pick for best actor has something to do with "politicking, sentiment, and restitution for previous slights"
But as I had pointed out, they don't use this category when dealing with an "ensemble cast". That's why none of the actors in No Country For Old Men were nominated for Best Actor, they are all supporting.
Apparently SIMCOE didn't know that
.

[Tony B.]

Thanks.

Originally Posted by simcoe

The answer to your question is No, its not a function of screen time. Anthony Hopkins won Best Actor in Silence of the Lambs with just 16 minutes of screen time. Certainly one could argue that Bardem had an equally terrifying impact as Hopkins and certainly more than 16 minutes of screen time. I have seen movies where two actors had fairly equal screen time with one being nominated for Best and the other for Supporting. IMO the nominations are more a function politicking, sentiment, and restitution for previous slights, than any "formula".

[Peter W.]

simcoe

take over, he likes you better,
I'm going to lay low for a while and give you some space for
more of your "it happened off screen" theories

-give em enough rope