1994: The only year that saw two action movies nominated for acting Oscars
By and large, the Academy Awards has always seemed reticent to honour action cinema.
While there have been exceptions throughout history, action movies are often overlooked by the Oscars in major award categories. Instead, if the voting body finds itself with an undeniable action spectacle, it tends to shower it with nominations in technical categories such as ‘Editing’, ‘Sound Mixing’, or ‘Visual Effects’. An action film breaking through with nominations in all four acting categories is extremely rare. That’s why it seems so strange to look back at a year when not one, but two action performances were in contention for ‘Best Supporting Actor’.
Before analysing the year the Academy finally embraced the skill that goes into action movie acting, it’s worth looking at some exceptions to its sidelining of the genre. In recent years, Black Panther was nominated for ‘Best Picture’ – a first for a superhero movie – but any nominations in the other big categories failed to materialise. Then, when the sequel Black Panther: Wakanda Forever came out, it wasn’t up for ‘Best Picture’, but Angela Bassett did receive a nomination for ‘Best Supporting Actress’.
At that same Oscars ceremony, Everything Everywhere All at Once was showered with awards in all the major categories, including three wins for acting. While Michelle Yeoh, Jamie Lee Curtis, and Ke Huy Quan took home Little Gold Men on that night for a movie with martial arts elements, it wouldn’t be correct to call it an “action movie,” per se. Instead, it’s an absurdist comedy-drama with sci-fi and action overtones – which probably made it ideal for the Academy to consider.
You see, the vast majority of times a movie featuring action has been rewarded, it has been within the context of a fantasy blockbuster (Sir Ian McKellan for The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring), a film that mixes genres with glee (Everything Everywhere), or a historical epic (Russell Crowe in Gladiator).
These movies aren’t pure action films in the same way The Fugitive and In the Line of Fire are. This brand of pulse-pounding thriller was all the rage in the 1990s, and audiences flocked to see stars like Harrison Ford on the run after being accused of his wife’s murder or Clint Eastwood as a Secret Service agent engaging in a deadly battle of wits with a Presidential assassin. These two 1993 films were the platonic ideal of brilliantly made, exceptionally exciting action filmmaking, and for once, Hollywood couldn’t ignore that they featured acting performances worthy of awards.
Therefore, at the 66th Academy Awards on March 21st, 1994, Tommy Lee Jones was nominated for his iconic portrayal of US Marshall Sam Gerard in The Fugitive, and John Malkovich also notched a nomination for his terrifying turn as In the Line of Fire’s ex-CIA killer Mitch Leary. They found themselves up against three more traditional Oscar contenders: Leonardo DiCaprio’s affecting performance in What’s Eating Gilbert Grape?, Pete Postlethwaite as Patrick ‘Giuseppe’ Conlon in In the Name of the Father, and Ralph Fiennes’ Amon Göth in Schindler’s List.
Against all the odds, Jones emerged victorious that night, proving that sometimes an exceptional performance in a movie designed to entertain the masses can be as worthy of awards glory as any heartrending drama. However, perhaps Hollywood got cold feet after this uncharacteristic pair of nominations because history hasn’t repeated itself.
After all, there’s never been an Oscar ceremony where two action movie villains – or heroes – have competed in the same category since this fateful night. The closest scenario was Heath Ledger and Robert Downey Jr vying for ‘Best Supporting Actor’ in 2009 for The Dark Knight and Tropic Thunder, but again, that’s slightly different – one is a superhero movie and the other a comedy with a few action scenes.
In closing, then, what does it all mean? It can’t be denied that Jones and Malkovich’s performances in two of the best action flicks of the ’90s were above and beyond the norm, but there have been superb turns in action movies since. Where was Ed Harris’ nomination for The Rock? How about Hugo Weaving’s for The Matrix? Charlize Theron’s incendiary turn in Mad Max: Fury Road? Hell, is there a world in which Keanu Reeves or Tom Cruise could be nominated for John Wick or Mission: Impossible?
Unfortunately, the word “impossible” seems depressingly apt. It’s hard not to believe the Academy simply doesn’t feel action movie acting is as important or accomplished as dramatic performing, and maybe that’s true in most cases. However, the fact that Hollywood’s voting body only felt action movie performances met its high standards once in its entire history is a crying shame at best and utterly preposterous at worst.
