By Ryan Riley, Contributor
I was proud to see Heath Ledger posthumously win the Best Supporting Actor award at the Oscars on Feb. 22, 2009. It is, in fact, the only reason I would have ever entertained the thought of watching the Oscars at all, and as luck would have it I happened upon that moment during the telecast when I was channel-surfing. I might not be remembering my Academy Awards history correctly, but it seems that Ledger is the first actor (at least in recent memory) to be nominated for an Oscar for playing a character from the genre of sci-fi/fantasy. This speaks volumes to how powerful Ledger's performance as the Joker in "The Dark Knight" was.
I personally had my doubts about how well Ledger could pull off playing the Joker before "The Dark Knight" came out. His past body of work didn't scream "Joker" to me, and I thought it was a gamble to cast someone not known for edgy roles in that part. I don't think I'm alone when I say that the gamble paid off handsomely, because his portrayal of the Joker floored me. He was that good.
I feel that Ledger truly deserves every honor and award bestowed upon him since his untimely death last year. I stress this point because what I am about to say will seemingly deviate from it. It is my opinion that, had Heath Ledger lived, he would not have been nominated for an Academy Award, even though he definitely deserved the nomination. This is not a slam on Ledger by any means. This is an indictment of the selection process generally used by the panel that selects Academy Award nominees every year. They have a tendency to ignore the increasingly awesome achievements made by films in the sci-fi/fantasy genre and focus strictly on dramatic films for their major nominations, such as Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Director, etc. Sure, they throw nomination bones like Best Film Editing, Best Sound Mixing and Best Visual Effects. That's pretty much a given, seeing as how the vast majority of sci-fi/fantasy films are effects-driven. "Lord of the Rings: Return of the King" broke down the walls Y2J-style for the Best Picture and Best Director awards back in 2004. But other than the nominations for Ian McKellan (as Gandalf in "Lord of the Rings") and Johnny Depp ( as Jack Sparrow in "Pirates of the Caribbean") the actor categories still seemed unattainable until Ledger came along.
The Academy voters are a slow bunch when it comes to change. With their past voting history, they would have been reticent to follow the lead of other award shows like the Golden Globes and the SAG Awards in nominating Ledger had he still been alive. But since he is dead, they saw fit to nominate him due to a combination of politics and pandering. He deserved the nomination, but it took his death for the Academy to recognize that.
In case you need an example of how snobbish the Academy can be, just look at the last guy to play the Joker on the big screen, Jack Nicholson. He was an Oscar winner prior to Tim Burton's "Batman", and he didn't get any recognition from the Academy for that role (or for his role the same year in the "Chinatown" sequel, "The Two Jakes"). Sure, his performance wasn't nearly as intense as Ledger's, but his performance was at least as good as those of Best Actor nominee Gerard Depardieu (for "Cyrano de Bergerac") and Best Actor winner Kevin Costner (for "Dances with Wolves"). But because of the genre of the film he acted in, he got no love from the Academy.
I'm going to give the Academy the benefit of the doubt with this one, because they seem to be finally warming up to the sci-fi/fantasy genre. The voters could have just nominated him to shut everyone up and selected one of the other nominees from the bunch. They ultimately decided to give the Best Supporting Actor award to the actor that turned in the most powerful performance, and it happened to be Heath Ledger. This was a major change in thinking for the Academy, and I hope this opens the way for more mainstream love of the sci-fi/fantasy genre.
It does help that the movie studios are finally attracting brilliant actors like Robert Downey Jr. and Gary Oldman to act in these types of movies (comic book movies in particular). If the upcoming "Watchmen" is even half as good as the graphic novel that spawned it, I don't think I'd be out of line in demanding that the Academy nominate Zack Snyder for Best Director. And it wouldn't be out of the question to see Downey eligible for a Best Actor award if they ever adapt the "Demon in a Bottle" storyline from the Iron Man comic into movie form. These scenarios are a lot more likely now then they would have been five years ago, and it's largely thanks to Heath Ledger.
You echoed a lot of what I stated in my January 27th "Dark Knight" piece on this site, Ryan. I'm inclined to agree with you that Heath Ledger probably would have gotten ignored for his performance had he not journeyed to the Plutonian Shore. Fantasy/Sci-Fi movies are ritually ignored by Oscar in the big three categories of Picture, Director and Screenplay. Acting performances usually go ignored in this genre too, no matter how great they are.
Prior to "Lord of the Rings", the last movies in this genre that I can think of that got nominated in all three categories of Picture, Director and Screenplay were "Star Wars" and "E.T.". "2001" got nominations for Director and Screenplay and "Close Encounters" got a Best Director nod. None of the above won in any category, though.
As far as acting nominations in Fantasy/Sci-Fi (no wins here, either): Alec Guinness got a Best Supporting Actor nod for "Star Wars", Melinda Dillon got a Best Supporting Actress nod for "Close Encounters" and Sigourney Weaver was nominated for Best Actress for "Aliens". I can't think of anyone else.