Oscar Experts Typing: Debating the Best Actor dark horse nominees
Welcome to Oscar Experts Typing, a weekly column in which Gold Derby editors and experts Joyce Eng and Christopher Rosen discuss the Oscar race — via Slack, of course. This week’s topic: Best Actor dark horses.
Christopher Rosen: Hello, Joyce! You’re no doubt riding on the high of the news that Conan O’Brien will host this year’s Oscars, a decision that seems absolutely perfect and immediately raises my interest in the ceremony on March 2, 2025. But we’re not here to type about Conan (I mean, unless you want to sing his praises). Instead, our focus this week is on the fellas in the Best Actor race. The remains the most static of our acting races — lacking both the depth of field and loud stan armies of the Best Actress race that we typed about last week. When we did our ridiculously early 2025 Oscar picks in March, we both picked Ralph Fiennes, Colman Domingo, and Daniel Craig as potential Best Actor nominees. Eight months later, we still have those three in the race, plus Adrien Brody for “The Brutalist” and Timothée Chalamet for “A Complete Unknown.” That’s the consensus five and while I’ve certainly flirted with several other options — including Sebastian Stan for “The Apprentice,” Paul Mescal for “Gladiator II,” Jesse Eisenberg for “A Real Pain,” and even, once upon a time, Joaquin Phoenix for “Joker: Folie à Deux” — I might just go down with this ship for the next two months. To be real: Brody, Domingo, and Fiennes seem so assured of nominations here that if any of them weren’t nominated I think it would count as one of the biggest upsets ever. Barring a showstopping turn from Chalamet as Bob Dylan, I expect the Best Actor winner to come from that trio (probably Brody, but you can convince me of Fiennes). Chalamet has been penciled into fourth place by nearly every pundit since Searchlight dated the James Mangold film for its Christmas release. The project is finally rolling out to the industry and people like us (we’re going to see it in a couple of weeks), and so whether he’s win-competitive remains to be seen. As for Craig, well, I’m not the biggest fan of his movie — I found “Queer” to be a difficult sit while also acknowledging that Craig’s performance is a standout (and, as usual with a Luca Guadagnino movie, the crafts are *chef’s kiss*) — but this kind of just feels like the performance that makes it in. I think he’ll have the passion among the project’s fans, and I think it’s “his time.” Plus, without a true consensus sixth person here — I could see any of those names I listed above having pockets of support — Craig feels like he’s potentially pretty safe. It kind of reminds me a little of when his Bond costar Ana De Armas made it through with “Blonde,” another polarizing and explicit drama. But as we’ve discussed many times, the best/worst thing to happen to this category would be if Chalamet isn’t a true contender. That would shake up the race so much, I wonder if it could lead to some truly left-field nominee. Of course, I’m thinking of Glen Powell for “Hit Man,” but while it’s tilting at windmills to consider two open spots in the Best Actor race, what do you think?
joyceeng: I suppose I’ll pause my Conan skit rewatch — nothing beats old timey baseball — to reply. Two open slots is what I floated to you in our mailbag this week, which will just make this category chaos magic, and you know I am here for it. I am also back on the consensus five, begrudgingly. Nothing against any of these men, but that would just be boring. But as we’ve discussed, try as we all might to look for an alternative to Craig for the fifth spot, maybe it’s just been Craig all along (last “WandaVision” reference, I promise). I am curious to see who takes the comedy/musical Globe since all five of these dudes will be in drama. I currently have Stan in first for “A Different Man,” another good 2024 Sebastian Stan film that will likely get the short shrift this season. Powell screams HFPA winner, but I’m not sure if the new Globes would go for him. Eisenberg would be a deserved winner and is the most likely to get a boost for the Oscars of the potential Globe champs (no offense to my beloved Michael Keaton). Should Eisenberg win — with or without Kieran Culkin prevailing in supporting — would you fancy him over Craig? I’m not sure either of them would hit SAG — I’ve been out on Craig there regardless of whether he hits the Oscars — which could go with John David Washington, who was once in my SAG lineup and delivers a very actor-friendly performance in “The Piano Lesson.” We were goofing on the pundit hype last week for Kingsley Ben-Adir at the Oscars, but he could totally make SAG as a SAG-only nominee a la Jennifer Hudson for another early release about a music icon.
More from GoldDerby
SEE Experts slugfest: ‘Emilia Pérez’ and Oscar predictions updates
Christopher Rosen: We did goof on Ben-Adir, but he absolutely feels like a viable candidate for the fifth spot at SAG. I am probably gonna predict that before this column is published. I personally think, of the second-tier actors we’ve mentioned, Eisenberg is the best dark horse. He’s actually fantastic in the film (arguably better than Culkin) and “A Real Pain” feels like it has a legitimate shot at a Best Picture nomination. You could say “Gladiator II” does as well — I’m still bullish on the film making it into the field — but no one thinks Mescal is exceptional in this movie. (I’m in the deep minority thinking he’s better here than in “Aftersun” and “All of Us Strangers.” Alas, it’s lonely being right!) I know you don’t like to type about winners right now — it is pretty silly — but allow me to get goofy. Who is going to win this one? Brody is the frontrunner — he tracks as the kind of undeniable, Daniel Day-Lewis-y winner we’ve seen in this category before. But Fiennes has that Paul Giamatti-esque veteran glow that I think a lot of pundits will gravitate toward as the season moves forward. Basically, this feels like a replay of last year’s race — albeit without the Globes split, since Fiennes and Brody are competing against each other in the drama category. Once upon a time, it felt like “The Brutalist” was the stronger movie — and that might hold true. But “Conclave” is ascendant, winning over Manhasset-style older ticket buyers and Letterboxd kids with equal measure. Do you think Fiennes can go all the way? Or will our winner come from somewhere else?
joyceeng: Like I told you the other day, if you had the conversation I had with Eisenberg, you would’ve immediately (re-)added him to your lineup as you’re wont to do. I enjoyed Mescal in “Gladiator II” more than I have ever enjoyed him in anything I’ve seen him in — it was just different to see him bring his low-key indie energy to a big-scale epic — but I don’t think he’ll come close to matching Russell Crowe‘s run. When we were asked a few weeks ago to ID this year’s Cillian Murphy — someone who is underestimated or antidicted for most of the season because of reasons until people could no longer deny that he was the one to beat (after his SAG win) — I don’t think either of us said Brody, but he actually makes the most sense, especially after we determined this week that Fiennes is Giamatti. Murphy was underestimated because this was his first Oscar nomination, even though he is a nearly 30-year industry veteran who’s worked with a ton of people and led “Peaky Blinders,” a massive TV show that has lots of famous fans. I wouldn’t say Brody would be underestimated, but there will be lots of arguments against him winning because he’s already won — even though voters have shown us over and over again they don’t care if you’ve won before and your main rival hasn’t — and because some people believe he doesn’t have a resume worthy of a two-time Oscar winner. (Brody also starred in “Peaky Blinders” Season 4, so this comp works in lots of ways.) Everyone’s on a “Conclave” high right now because it’s a rare adult drama that’s tasting box office success and people across all demos likes. I’m not saying “The Brutalist” will perform as well, but Brody and Fiennes are not on an level playing field right now since one of their films isn’t out yet to provide additional data points. Someone we haven’t mentioned and who could also be a SAG-only thing if the cards are played right is Nicholas Hoult for “Juror #2.” Warner Bros. was basically bullied into launching a small campaign for the Clint Eastwood flick, but will it play the cards right?
SEE Oscar Experts Typing: Demi Moore is on the doorstep of the Best Actress lineup
Christopher Rosen: I’m gonna say no. Plus, while I enjoyed Hoult in “Juror #2,” it probably ranks as my third-favorite Hoult performance this fall behind “The Order” and “Nosferatu.” Let’s end here with some hilarious Weekly World News-style conspiracy mongering. Way back when, it was once suggested that Denzel Washington would go lead for “Gladiator II” and having seen the film, arguments could be made that he’s the story driver — even if his screen time lags behind Mescal’s by what I assume is a decent margin. Do you think, if “A Complete Unknown” flops and if enough voters aren’t enamored with the field of alternate options, that Washington could surprise as a Best Actor nominee rather than Best Supporting Actor like we all expect? Are you not entertained?
joyceeng: Like I was back then, I am terribly vexed by the mere suggestion. It wouldn’t even make sense as a reverse “Judas and the Black Messiah,” which was a two-hander. When voters have sent supporting campaigners to lead, it’s been to correct a “fraud,” like Keisha Castle-Hughes and Kate Winslet. Plus, everyone watching “Gladiator II” will be more concerned with things like the sharks, monkeys, rhinos, and [redacted] than thinking about Denzel being the story driver. Mescal might not make it, but he’s the you-know-what and everyone knows that.
Best of GoldDerby
Sign up for Gold Derby's Newsletter. For the latest news, follow us on Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram.
Solve the daily Crossword
