3 Times Lucky: Mark Ruffalo
Saturday, February 20, 2016 at 7:06PM 
Murtada here. Love for the Meryl and C/Kates of the world can skewer perceptions. It's rare for actors to receive multiple Oscar nods. Most first nominations are also last nominations. Less than 180 actors in Oscars 88 years have managed 3 or more. And this year Mark Ruffalo in Spotlight joined that list. (The rest is after the jump due to extreme gif'ing).
In short 3 Oscar nominations is nothing to scoff at.
Right, Mark Ruffalo?
Riiiiight.
But 3 doesn’t exactly get the "why haven't they won?" drums beating. Just ask Ed Harris (4 nominations) or Amy Adams (5). Or even this year’s golden reunion couple, Kate Winslet and Leonardo DiCaprio; the drum beating only got loud at their 6th and 5th nominations respectively.
Yet fellow 3 timer Christian Bale is happy for Mark. Or is he happy because he already won?
So congrats Mark Ruffalo, but apparently 3 is not enough on its own to make you a serious contender for the win.
Ruffalo was the soul of Spotlight. Some called the performance a bit mannered. He was going for an impression of the real life person he was playing and from all accounts he got that down pat. He’s the only member of the SAG winning ensemble in Spotlight who got what you'd call a big "Oscar clip".
Let’s remind those voters who haven’t voted yet.
And while we are at it, one more from The Kids Are All Right (2010), Ruffalo was robbed!
Still... sorry, Mark. Apparently Sylvester Stallone got this in the bag.
But what if he wins? Would he react as cutely and appreciatively as he did when Meryl Streep planted one on him on the Graham Norton Show?
We would be so lucky if he brought along Kirsten Dunst for a a bit of dancing.
Mark obviously has my vote, but does he have yours?
Who would you vote for in supporting actor?
Reader Comments (42)
It'd be a disservice for Bale to win again in this category. I'm sure when it's time he'll get a second one in Best Actor.
Rylance is a non-factor. Daniel Day-Lewis did not break the curse on actors winning for performances directed by Spielberg and PTA.
Stallone seems like a sure thing on paper. But it's very possible he'll get passed over as other veteran comeback stories of past seasons have (Rourke and Keaton).
Hardy is a definite threat to upset. A win in this category suits him just fine. And he'll likely be a coattail victory alongside his leading co-star and possible Best Picture victory.
Ruffalo could upset because he's liked enough to actually earn a win eventually and his movie is a strong candidate for Best Picture.
Boo, this is Kate's 7th nom.
Well, I'm voting for Rylance with Ruffalo as runner up.
Fuck stallone.
/3rtful:
Bale: Yes, he might win again. But this is, probably, just ballot filler to start confirming to people that he might. Actually happening for this is pretty unlikely. 4th Place. Ballot Filler.
Hardy: He's not really perceived as overdue for a win (the only way an acting WIN for something like The Revenant actually makes sense), and considering Domhnall Gleeson actually came closest to walking away with that trainwreck? (Not that anyone emerges spotless from having to deliver a script that's that bad.) Nope. Don't buy it. 5th Place. Ballot Filler.
Ruffalo: He over-sells that ending speech, and is the least interesting of the core cast. Still, this is a kind of movie where an acting win makes sense beyond "overdue" considerations. 3rd Place. Outside Chance.
Rylance: If any performance is going to upset the (deserved) Stallone career honours narrative, it's probably this one. It's 5th on my ballot, but my second most preferred of the nominees. 2nd Place. Fighting but unlikely.
Stallone: In spite of one hiccup at the Globes speech, I fail to see how this isn't his to lose. I actually cried at his work in this, unlike that embarrassing blubbering in First Blood. 1st Place. Probable winner.
My love for Ruffalo knows no bounds. I even (mostly) like him in Spotlight, although it's the least of his 3 nominated performances.
At any rate, I'm glad he's joined the easy-to-nominate club.
I love Mark Ruffalo. The guy is such a good actor and when he's being interviewed, he's humble but when he's in the presence of other famous people like Meryl. He becomes a fanboy.
Fadhil - yes. we had a post on Kate's nom. he means that the drum beating that she was overdue was on the 6th nom and that is definitely correct. she won.
Love Mark but he wasn't even the best supporting actor in Spotlight. His performance is one of his weakest and the worst among his nominations.
Totally true that most never get nominated once, let alone again. And even winning is no guarantee of a career. Ruffalo is solid but he has Amy Adams limited charisma or voter sway? Random, but I really would like to see McAvoy act with Streep, and I hope they discussed this.
Random, but I really would like to see McAvoy act with Streep
Why? I never think of her having chemistry with her male co-stars except Chris Cooper.
Does that "fewer than 180" include both male and female actors? Somehow that number seems like a lot and a not a little to me, if we're talking about three or more nominations.
Meryl with Eastwood. No chemistry
Meryl with Brosnan,Firth. No chemistry
Meryl with Nicholson. No chemistry.
Ok.
I found him mannered in Spotlight. No idea how he and Rachel McAdams were nominated when others in that cast, like Keaton were better.
I love Mark Ruffalo and he won't be winning this year but he has established himself as safe pair of hands for any project. For an actor that's a great place to be, I'm thinking of Robert Duvall, Morgan Freeman, type of character actors. He'll be back.
Meryl and Stanley Tucci - no chemistry? RIGHT.
It's hard to be Lady Edith in a Lady Mary world.
I love this post and I REALLY WANT MARK RUFFALO TO WIN!
Patryk: Agreed. Meryl and Stanley Tucci are so good together, in both The Devil Wears Prada and Julie & Julia.
I like Ruffalo and I could see him winning this year (though I think it'll be Stallone). But I'm pretty sure he'll continue to do good work. As LadyEdith very nicely puts it, he's a safe pair of hands.
I actually thought he was borderline horrible in Spotlight.
Still, I think his performance in Foxcatcher should've won him the Oscar. A perfectly nuanced performance, especially his scene when he was being coached on what to say about Steve Carell's character.
I'd be okay with anyone winning except Stallone. :/ Usually, even if I don't like who wins (McConaughey x Ejiofor, for example), at least I can console myself with the knowledge that the winner was at least deserving. I genuinely cannot understand why people think Stallone deserves this Oscar. I can't even think of one scene in Creed they can use for his clip. Supporting Actor is my least favourite category this year, but I'd be okay with Ruffalo or Hardy winning. I hope it's the first category so we can get it out of the way.
Mike: I thought he was excellent in Spotlight. That on-camera interview scene was stunning. And the relationship his character had with his brother...Ruffalo deployed body language brilliantly to convey the closeness, the concern, the fear, the helplessness... Much more subtle work that J. K. Simmons'. Ruffalo or Ethan Hawke for the win last year, if I had had my way!
Edward L: That's Foxcatcher.
Anna: When he goes off on "everyone is gone" and not wanting to fight his cancer because he just wants to see his friends and family again?
This should've been his 4th nom anyway. I think he should've been nominated for You can count on me . Having said that, while I have heard that he was channeling the real life person he plays and that's fair enough, I find Michael Keaton's and Liev Schrieber's performances much more nuanced. I would definitely have nominated both of them over Ruffalo. And I liked him fine. But it's the usual case of "the most acting" being mistaken for "the best acting". The only reason McAdams got nominated was because she's the only woman in the cast. I really liked her but hers is a really subtle performance and I really doubt she would've got in if there'd been another female, more flashy performance in the movie.
Carlos: I agree that Ruffalo was wonderful in You Can Count on Me, and should have been nominated for it. It's arguably his finest work.
As for Rachel McAdams, she's perfectly fine in Spotlight, but I still maintain that she does nothing particularly noteworthy; any number of actresses could have played that part just as well. It's a ballot filler for sure. I would have replaced her with Joan Allen in Room.
Rob: Agreed! Joan Allen getting a nom would've been great. She was very good in Room , really selling the family dynamics (old and new) and making an impression in the story, which is quite something considering how invested the audience is on Ma and Jack by the time she comes into the story. I would've also have preferred Walters or Paulson in that slot... or rather, alongside it, getting rid of fraudulent nominees (cough... Mara, Vikander... cough).
Meryl and Robert Redford - no chemistry.
I thought Ruffalo was really terrible in Spotlight, to the point that McCarthy should have realized he was acting in a different film than everyone else. I know it's been justified that he was playing a person who is *really like that*, but it was so discordant with the rest of the film that it took me out of the film to the point that I couldn't really involve myself in it. Spotlight is one of my least favorite BP nominees, and Ruffalo's performance is one of the main reasons why.
On the other hand, I think he was absolutely brilliant in Foxcatcher (that scene where he is asked to describe Carrell as a mentor - WOW). I actually think it is one of the greatest supporting actor performances of the decade. What a weirdly inconsistent actor.
Suzanne: With three major ones (You Can Count On Me, Shutter Island and Margaret) left to see (and, thus, no business structuring a full 10), this is my conception of Ruffalo's top 5 performances:
1. Paul Hatfield, The Kids Are All Right
2. Bruce Banner, The Avengers
3. Dan Mulligan, Begin Again
4. Stan Fink, Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind
5. Ray Fanning, Collateral
For my money, McAdams totally deserves her nomination - and kudos to the Academy for nominating her. So often they go for 'most acting' rather than 'best acting' (and I agree with Suzanne's take on Ruffalo in Spotlight, although it didn't harm my enjoyment of the film), but in the case of McAdams, they have noticed her subtle work and nominated her for it. She totally sold the notion that she was a work colleague, an 'ordinary person', and a journalist. She gets the tone of Spotlight exactly and strengthens the ensemble. Her filmography up this point hasn't generally been one that would have suggested "future Oscar nominee", and so I think the Academy has done the right thing by her. They can't catch a break: if they had nominated someone showier, we would probably be saying "McAdams deserved it, but was to subtle for Oscar!" This time, they were subtle enough for her!
Irritates me that I haven't seen Spotlight and a bunch of other nominated work this year. Today at last, Im gonna watch The Revenant. I dunno what to expect but people in Oslo seem to love it.
I thought Bale was excellent in The Big Short unlike Carrell and Gosling. Bale stole the show and is easily the MVP. The Big Short is also a fun and great movie at the same time. Surprised by the quality I must say
Ruffalo was at his best in Zodiac.
Streep with Hathaway and Blunt. Terrible chemistry. With ten examples you get free eggrolls.
Pass
I really like Mark Ruffalo--but I'm in the "he was pretty terrible in Spotlight" camp. I've never seen someone actually RUN in a movie in such an over-the-top way. He was unintentionally laughable at times. I'm still a fan, and even great actors give bad performances sometimes--but I can't believe he was nominated for this.
His other two nominations were totally worthy, though, and I think he should DEFINITELY have been nominated for You Can Count on Me.
Paul -- that includes male and female. Since there are 20 nominees per year that's 1760 performances (minus supporting for the first 8 years or so and minus a few due to lower than 5 nominees for first few years) so at least 1600 performances have been nominated. Only 170 or so actors have been nominated 3 times or more.
Joe -- i agree. It's a real shame that it wasn't Keaton for this particular movie.
I thought Ruffalo had maybe one or two bad moments, but overall I thought he was good in Spotlight. Not really sold on McAdams' performance. Not that it wasn't good, but I just don't find it exceptional or even exceptionally nuanced. It was just a straightforward, workaday role. Kind of how I felt about Spotlight as a whole, outside of its overall issue's importance. That said, I'd much rather see it win than The BS or The Revanant.
be pretty sad if Ruffalo wins for his...decent performance in Spotlight when he was brilliant in Foxcatcher. Hell, if he got nominated for the first Avengers movie I would've preferred him winning for that than for Spotlight
I agree with Suzanne RE Ruffalo and Spotlight. He should have adapted to the tone of the film rather than having everyone else adjust to meet his. I get that he is playing a real person who may have been like that but was no one watching the dailies? Could they not see that he was on a different wavelength then everyone else?
All that said, he has worked with a lot of people and has lots of friends. They all cheered when he won the SAG for Normal Heart and Julia Roberts is probably in his corner which also helps. Remember when Bradley Cooper got his 3rd nom and people started predicting him as a spoiler because 3 means you are owed? Maybe him loosing this year will be the best thing for him. When he gives a really great performance, then people can say how much he has been nominated before and hasn't won yet (like Leo this year)
I am amazed I get this much attention. Thank you!
Another one of those annoying Academy instances where the two least worthy performances (Ruffalo & McAdams) are the ones singled out. At Edward: I appreciate your viewpoint but I'll say it again: there is absolutely nothing about McAdams' perfectly serviceable acting in this movie that screams, "Give This Woman an Oscar!" Even a nom is a stretch.
Joe: The Foxcatcher nomination wasn't exactly unworthy, but it's also something I'm kind of unsure would have stuck to nomination morning without The Avengers in the background and Spotlight DEFINITELY wouldn't have swung his way without The Avengers in the background.
Love the love for Mark's performance in You Can Count On Me. So fantastic in that. If you think he wasn't all that in Spotlight just watch You Can Count on Me and you'll be rooting for him Sunday night as well.
Spotlight is my No. 1 film from last year, and it's saying something that it survived Ruffalo's misjudged work. He's not awful by any stretch, but he sticks out like a sore thumb. He literally is leaning on a mannerism. Keaton should be here instead of him.
@Volvagia - that's...questionable. I'd wager you give more weight to superhero movie performances than Academy members.
I'm still conflicted on Ruffalo in Spotlight. Some people just ARE bigger than those around them. They tend to suck up the energy in the room or just pull focus. I'm not sure how Ruffalo could've dialed it down without just completely erasing this person's individuality. One of the other team members tells him he's a pain in the ass, so if Ruffalo was just "normal" how would that line work at all?
But yeah, You Can Count on Me, Kids Are All Right and Foxcatcher are prime Ruffalo.
Really, Ruffalo had even more legitimate reasons for an Oscar nomination, in the past, with his performances in "You Can Count on Me," "We Don't Live Here Anymore," and "What Doesn't Kill You." Perhaps his lead performance in "Infinitely Polar Bear," this past year, played a small part in his "Spotlight nomination, as Stanley Tucci, or Brian d'Arcy James would've made equally legitimate contenders for that Best Supporting Actor slot. (Not that I'm complaining - Ruffalo is a great actor, and he deserves to be recognized as such. He is an Oscar-calibre actor whether he's got an Oscar to his name or not. I hope someday he *will* have that Oscar, but for something a lot more challenging, like his earlier work).