Anthony Hopkins' shocking win shouldn't have shocked anyone.
Wednesday, April 28, 2021 at 10:12PM by Baby Clyde
Thank you all very much. I really did not expect this.
I watched the last 20 minutes of the 93rd Academy Awards with a sense of impending doom. The disastrous decision to cynically rearrange the final awards in the hope of ending the night on a contrived ‘high’ immediately struck me as problematic. Whilst back in the day Best Picture wasn’t always given out last, it’s been that way for nearly 50 years and changing the order this year was clearly done for one and only one reason. The emotional finale meant to honor Chadwick Boseman with a posthumous award was something the hapless producers couldn’t resist, and it infamously backfired. A slow moving, gold plated car crash ensued as Sir Anthony Hopkins was declared the winner. With no back up plan, no Zoom speeches allowed and no host to close the show the evening ground to an unceremonious halt. If only they’d asked me, the day could have been saved.
I’m not a great Oscar predictor. Every year I seem to get 17 or 18 right. Usually tripped up by the Shorts, even if I’ve watched them all --no, especially if I’ve watched them all! But this year I did manage to successfully predict both Lead acting races, despite them both supposedly being "shocks". Best Actor was less clear, yes, but I put Hopkins in the #1 spot back in September and never moved him. I’ve been Oscar watching a VERY long time (When I started Glenn Close only had Supporting noms) and sometimes you just get a feeling about a particular race. For example, I never once thought Stallone was winning back in 2015 and I’m still puzzled when people insist Meryl’s third was a surprise as it was inevitable. I felt exactly that way this year and as the season went on (and on and on) there was plenty of evidence, I present six pieces, pointing in that direction...
1. The Nominations
Something was clearly up on nomination morning when The Father overperformed nabbing 6 in total including the all-important Best Picture as well and lower profile but very telling noms in Editing and Production Design. By contrast Ma Rainey slightly underperformed with 5 nominations which didn’t include Picture or a much expected Adapted Screenplay nod. The warning signs were there.
2. Academy Voters Are Not A Sentimental As People Think
Just ask Glenn Close or Diane Warren (or poor Peter O’Toole who lost for the 8th time 42 years after his first nomination). As for posthumous awards there have only been 2 such acting wins in Oscar history. James Dean lost twice. The two winners (Peter Finch (Network – 1976) and Heath Ledger (The Dark Knight – 2008) gave entirely iconic performances and would have won under most circumstances. Voters didn’t see fit to rewards Hollywood royalty Spencer Tracy (Who hadn’t won in 30 years) or acting legend Sir Ralph Richardson whose career had spanned over 60 years when they were nominated posthumously. It always seemed slightly unlikely that this was the year to buck the trend. Which brings me to the bit you’re not going to like…
3. Chadwick Boseman Was Not That Famous Outside of America
The Academy’s long overdue drive to diversify its membership has had an obvious impact on the awards over the last few years. With thousands of new voters from all over the world the awards have a far more international perspective; that also means a far less U.S. centric one. This may have had an effect on the Best Actor outcome. Since his tragic, untimely death I've heard a lot (here in the UK) about the legacy Boseman left behind and the iconic performances he’d given but I don’t think that really resonated across the ocean. Boseman made his name playing legendary American heroes Jackie Robinson (42 - 2013), James Brown (Get On Up – 2014) and Thurgood Marshall (Marshall – 2017) in a trio of biopics that barely registered internationally. They made less than $4m combined outside of the US. His worldwide breakthrough came as the title character in Marvel’s mega hit Black Panther, but I’d be surprised if most international voters had seen him in anything else before 2020. The choices he made and performances he gave post Panther clearly show a hugely talented actor with an illustrious career ahead of him, but a posthumous win also suggests something of a career award, and I think a sizeable contingent of voters, who only really knew him as a comic book character, didn’t see the necessity in this, especially when his main competition was an acting titan and household name who last won nearly 30 years ago.
4. Timing
Sony Pictures Classics timed their campaign to perfection. Sometimes when a nominee has been the favourite all season long and the win seems like a foregone conclusion, by the time voters have their say they are ready to consider other options. In this case The Father made a splash at Sundance back in January 2020 but then laid low for almost an entire year which proved to be a canny move. With Hopkins missing in action the Boseman narrative took hold, but word of mouth was strong on The Father and its unavailability made people even more eager to see it. Whilst this was extremely frustrating for film lovers it was clearly seen by the right people (aka in this case awards voters). Momentum began to build. I managed to track a copy down in January and at once knew that as soon as Hopkins’ performance was more widely seen the race would change. The slow roll out meant that voters were seeing the film at exactly the right time. It garnered 6 BAFTA noms to go along with its 6 Oscar nominations and Hopkins triumph at the most predictive of awards shows (11 Best Actor matchups in a row) sealed the deal. Boseman’s loss to Ahmed at the Indie Spirits was also a warning that went unheeded. Whilst The Father’s visibility was on the rise Ma Rainey’s was waning. At one point it was shunted off into Netflix’s Hidden Gems section (at least here in the UK).
Whilst I’m sure the voting bodies have .001 % overlap it was interesting to see The Film Experience’s own Oscar preference poll in the days leading up to the big night. Ahmed won and Boseman came in 3rd. in 3rd. A Twitter poll by the And The Runner-Up Is podcast which also garnered hundreds of votes also had Boseman in 3rd behind Ahmed and winner Hopkins. These are movie fan polls and aren't representative of the Academy at all but they certainly suggest that the race wasnt over and people really loved the work of both Hopkins and Ahmed.
5. Subject Matter Matters
And in this case The Father’s devastating portrayal of a parent’s descent into dementia will undoubtedly have hit home with voters. By definition, The Academy is always going to be made up of an older demographic and many of them will have related to this subject in a way that they didn’t with the other films. It’s a really devastating depiction and anyone who has encountered a relative or loved one going through something similar can’t help but be affected by it. This is especially true when the performance at its centre is such a masterclass which bring us to the last and most important point...
6. He Deserved It
Before I go any further it needs to be said that Chadwick Boseman gives a sensational performance in Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom. There is no doubt that had he won it would have been entirely warranted. In fact, 2020’s Best Actor crop was one of the strongest in years. There were four entirely worthy nominees (And Gary Oldman) any of whom would have made an outstanding winner. I’m pretty certain that Riz Ahmed wasn’t far behind our assumed top two. Obviously, this kind of thing is entirely subjective, and we will all have our personal favourites but whoever you think gave the best performance it’s impossible to argue that Hopkins win is undeserved. He may not be your personal choice but there is no doubt it’s a remarkable piece of work.
click on the photo to hear Anthony accept his Oscar at home.
With my strong suspicion that he might pull it off I was kind of dreading a Hopkins victory because of the inevitable Twitterstorm and stream of bad takes from people who know next to nothing about how any of this works. I’m 100% certain that 99% of those up in arms about it haven’t seen both performances. The backlash didn’t turn out to be half as bad as I’d expected mostly because Sir Anthony Hopkins is universally admired, and the performance is stunning. Maybe his best ever. One of the all-time great wins in my opinion. It’s unfortunate that Soderbergh and Co’s cheap shot production decision put such a damper on the evening for the late great Boseman’s family and supporters as well as putting the 83 year old living legend Hopkins in such an awkward position. Hopefully, next year things go back to normal which will include me making far less successful predictions.
more from Baby Clyde
more about our Team
more on this season's Oscars
Anthony Hopkins, BAFTA, Best Actor, Oscars (20), The Father
Reader Comments (66)
Anthony Hopkins is a deserving winner. His performance will age as immaculately as his talents have.
The only thing that would have made his win more sweet would have been for him to tie with Riz Ahmed, my boyfriend in another dimension.
Hopkins won twice for two great performances—The Silence of the Lambs and The Father.
I kept saying I thought Hopkins would win and kept being dismissed. You explain why this "shock" happened beautifully and fully.
Thank you for this—this was a really well written, well articulated, objective analysis.
I have no problem with him winning. It was just the announcement of him winning at the end of the show just made it look bad and Hopkins got blamed for no reason. I feel bad for him and I'm glad Chadwick Boseman's family defended Hopkins.
Could you write the response to McDormand clinching her third? Nathaniel once made reference to how Swank secured her second when everyone else in the category had passionate supporters. Ultimately when four or more can have a case made for them the previous winner or the one in a best picture nominee becomes a default vote for voters.
Very weird to write this article without discussing the academy's resistance to Black actors broadly, and rewarding Black Lead actors specifically. It also seems important that Black actors aren't really recognized at international awards (Denzel has no BAFTA noms). Forrest Whitaker won for a British film and Jamie Foxx won for a massive international hit.
I think all the factors you mentioned are important, but that one, too, seems like an important consideration. Especially as the academy diversifies, it's easy to see themes of race in films being overlooked by a more international academy that sees it as niche issue.
I will say, though, Hopkins is a worthy winner. His performance was strong and he feels hot right now coming off his strong work in the Two Pope (where he would have made a fine winner). I see this as similar to the Colman/Close case, where the upset was one that was equally/almost as equally deserving as the person expected to win. At least this didn't go to Gary Oldman.
I have to imagine that Netflix's struggle to get wins in the top categories will make them less attractive to the top talent they've been able to attract. SPC played this game well, and unlike in 2018, made no real errors.
"There were four entirely worthy nominees (And Gary Oldman)"
LMAO the shade
but totally agree with this article, the problem is that the telecast producers assumed (as everybody) that Boseman would win and built the last act of the ceremony around that and ended up blowing them on the face and it was inevitable a bittersweet feeling because Hopkins' win wasn't celebrated properly and it felt completely disrespectful to Boseman's widow
@Joe G
Baby Clyde is Black. And Ray Charles is internationally known. Sort of how Bassett would have benefited in a year where her closest rival wasn't in a prestige bait juggernaut.
I was hoping Hopkins would win, and once I started reading all the anonymous Oscar voters who said "I know Boseman will win, but I'm voting Hopkins," I knew it was a live race. Perceptions of inevitability exist more in the eyes of the general population than the voters.
I think it's similar to the 90s upsets that kept "sure thing" winners like Lauren Bacall and Gloria Stewart from happening. Some people like to not watch the films and go along with the crowd pick, but some people REALLY don't, and will vote against a performance they don't really respect, especially if everyone's telling them they can't.
3rtful - in a year where her closest rival wasn't in a prestige bait juggernaut?
Really? The first (and so far only) Palme d'Or winner directed by a woman, which became an unquestionable contender per critics and guilds and overperformed in noms comparing Bassett's film?
Don't get me wrong. I would have declared a tie, but Hunter has a lot of advantages comparing Bassett at that time.
@Marsha Mason, good point. A huge wave of anonymous Oscar voters was on that line: "Boseman will win so I voted for my favourite performance - Anthony Hopkins". Exactly the same line with Olivia Colman-Glenn Close and Mark Rylance-Sylvester Stallone. When a huge part of these anonymous votes came like that, that means the race is still open.
I never doubted Hopkin's performance since I saw it on Sundance. After leaving, I told myself this performance is titanic and FTA (for the ages) and will win the OSCAR. The campaign was the outstanding film overall and the performance. I'm glad it won and this is one of the best wins in recent memory and an all-time great.
Hopkins will have two iconic performance to be remembered.
I was rooting for this upset all the night!
Hopkins performance is the one for the ages and It's always a thrill when see the right one winning!
I was ecstatic when I heard Anthony's name. I loved Riz Ahmed's performancr but Anthony Hopkins blew me away and left me in tears. Which has been happening very rarely with the lack of good adult dramas. Wherever I go online people are over the moon that Hopkins won. I am from Europe and I'm inclined to think that the European vote went entirely to him.
The shift of the order lifts up the expectation and hence dramatized the disappointment. Imagine if the 2018 best actress award were shifted to the last, then we might hear some suicidal news from certain fan group.
I actually thought Hopkins would lose to Boseman or Ahmed because SPC has so often been lousy at awards campaigns (French Exit, The Human Voice, Pain and Glory, Call Me By Your Name, The Wife, Elle, Film Stars Don't Die in Liverpool, The Skin I Live In, Toni Erdmann, Julieta, The Lady in the Van, Amour, Rust and Bone). Fortunately for Cate Blanchett and J.K. Simmons, their wins were foolproof. I guess the same is true for Hopkins.
Of course the European votes went to Anthony Hopkins and not Boseman. Since the Academy decided to include more members, there has been a rise in actually worthy winners - Hopkins, Colman, Parasite etc. Worldwide members vote for the best performances/films and do not feel any need to follow the American politics way of thinking.
Brilliant and articulate analysis. Thank you. I agree: please do one for Frances McDormand.
@Baby Clyde, thank you for this superb & insightful article!
Hopkins DESERVES the win, no doubts abt it....apparently pple r (rightfully) going after the producers (Soderbergh & Co) for this glaring misstep, rather than blaming it on Hopkins; who is actually receiving alotsa love from all corners, and rightfully so.
I tink Boseman loses the momentum to voters' fatigue (from being constantly hammered this is the LAST chance to honor him), & an Oscar season tt drags on like forever. Had the Oscar been given out been a week or maybe two after SAG awards, he might still have a good chance to capitalize on his SAG victory.
But the loooong gap between SAG & Oscars allow voters to seriously consider other late breaking contenders esp when they can see that he is not really unstoppable (Bafta & to a lesser extent, Indie Spirits).
I agreed The Academy is def NOT as sentimental as pple envision it to be (Halo, Glenn Close, Goodbye Peter O'Toole), & the last tink they want is to other pple telling HOW & WHO to vote! lol
James Dean was nominated twice posthumously and lost both times. He’s still an icon. The same is true of Chadwick. His legacy will forever live on despite losing the Oscar. We will always wonder what could’ve been. It’s sad because I think he was on his way to being the Denzel/Sidney Poitier of our times.
@Joe G I was just thinking how crazy it is Forest Whitaker is the last Black actor to win Best Actor. The Best Actress category is even worse in this disregard. Halle Berry is still the only Black/biracial woman to win Best Actress, and she won for a rather degrading role.
I’m 100% certain that 99% of those up in arms about it haven’t seen both performances.
I would take it a step further and say that most Twitter complainers have seen neither The Father nor Ma Rainey.
The emotional finale meant to honor Chadwick Boseman with a posthumous award was something the hapless producers couldn’t resist, and it infamously backfired.
I may be the first person to point this out, but... what was the best case scenario for the Oscar producers here? To end a ceremony with the grand gesture of Joaquin Phoenix and Chadwick Boseman's widow? That's a lot of faith to put into two people who are not professional speech makers.
And why was Joaquin Phoenix presenting Lead Actor instead of Lead Actress anyway? Renée Zellweger isn't great with off-the-cuff speaking either, but at least she can take direction and follow a script.
If the producers wanted to honor Chadwick Boseman in a way other than being about the 98th and final person of the In Memoriam montage, they could have just given him a tribute. Maybe they could have had one of his former co-stars introduce it, like, I don't know, Angela Bassett or Harrison Ford. Maybe Don Cheadle. They were all right there!
In the world of sports, we call these decisions "unforced errors". It was a simple call. Chadwick Boseman tribute. In Memoriam at a regular pace, spread over two songs (I'm sure Questlove can handle a decent song transition). Phoenix presents Lead Actress, then Zellweger presents Lead Actor, then Rita Moreno presents Best Picture. The ceremony ends with Frances McDormand howling.
Why am I better at this than the well-paid professionals?
Didn't shock me. Would have been my vote and it was a really close race in terms of quality with Ahmed as third party. But it was a career best, in one of the best acting careers, so kind of undeniable... Boseman was also a career best, but in a way shorter career, cut too soon. Ahmed's could be considered a career best, but I think he was even better and more challenged in Four Lions, a suicidal - pun intended - project and role, that could have literally ended his career.
Sam, how funny would that be? Places other than The Film Experience would have exploded in 2018 if Actress was presented last!
A win for the ages.
I'm amazed by all the American film critics associations that nomianted him and his movie -probably without having seen it- and then voted for someone else.
this is a wonderfully written article...congrats on the beautiful job, an insightful and dead-on assay on Hopkins' victory. i agree wholeheartedly that this is one of the all-time greatest Best Actor wins in the history of the race. people use the stupid phrase "master class in acting" all the time, but Hopkins' work here TRULY is that. and i didn't run into a single person who wasn't walloped by THE FATHER. everything about it is a knockout.
There is also another hint that wasn't mentioned, I think: Boseman was expected to cruise to a supporting actor nomination for Da 5 Bloods, and didn't get that one also.
Another note, Twitter is a disgrace and the complaints there shouldn't be taken seriously. People just go there to complain, to be offended and to try to cancel things. People are bored and they try to find things to complain about. We are in the age of everyone having a strong opinion, about things they don't even know anything about.
Excellent writing and so in depth,I still maintain Boseman was a good Actor with lots of potential infront of him but to start legend/legacy conversations I felt was a bit too much and misjudged,the most deserving man won.
Great analysis! I'd personally rather combine 2 and 3 to note that Finch and Ledger had built up international bases of support and gave memorable ("iconic" seems a little strong to me, especially when it comes to the Joker) performances. But with this year's awards season giving Simone Boseman the chance to make beautifully heartwarming speeches (especially that NAACP Image Award speech imploring early colon cancer detection for people of color), it did feel like we were on the precipice of a culminating "moment," with her "finally" "able" to give one of those speeches in person, and, for me, it's that disconnect that proved more shocking than a very deserving performance by Hopkins winning.
Maybe Soderbergh just envisioned a major upset, as a plot twist, for his cinematic approach. “We’ll put best actor last, as Tony or Riz can win and we’ll be discussed forever, La La Land/Moonlight-style”.
A whole article just to say "I told you so!"' That's so condescending and shitty. Show some respect for Boseman's family and legacy. He didn't deserve the mockery that transpired on Sunday night and should have won his rightful Oscar.
Sir Anthony Hopkins in The Father is not a category filler and he's been treated that way for the entire season. Show some respect for your elders.
Too bad Steven Yeun stole Mads Mikkelsen's place.
I'm so glad that Sir Anthony Hopkins prevailed and the best ACTING PERFORMANCE was recognized. I got my best (and only laugh) from the ceremony when the 'save the best for last' category switch backfired and the show was left with egg on their faces. I fault the image-conscious/race & award quota conscious debacle on the Academy. Waiting for a full-scale investigation from certain parties that Less international new voters be recruited because 'they won't vote for the right people.' Agree that those who Boseman to win probably never bothered to watch the other 4 performance and expected voters to just vote on emotion.
Baby Clyde, thank you so much for this. Brilliantly written article and one of the best articulations of a well-deserved win. Truth be told, I haven't bothered watching any of the Oscar films this year (more on that later) except, ironically The Father and I privately hoped Hopkins would win. So I'm very happy.
@Joe G ''Especially as the academy diversifies, it's easy to see themes of race in films being overlooked by a more international academy that sees it as niche issue.''
Em...Wouldn't this not be the ideal? I mean, the poison of identity politics and grievance narratives is directly linked to the Oscars having an historically low viewership this year at less than 10 million. Also, people are annoyed at listening to virtue signaling narcissists preaching to them about far-leftist politics; Covid only emphasized how completely out of touch these people truly are. (Remember when they all sang 'Imagine' last year? Jesus..)
I used to love, LOVE, the Oscars but ever since 2016 it's all gone downhill. And the proof is in the harsh reality that very few people care about them anymore. We can all see that Hollywood is a horrible place now. The curtain has dropped. And as someone who has dedicated almost twenty years of my life to cinema, I am not saying this lightly.
Thank God that better performance won!
@ Tim I agree one hundred percent;
Chadwick and Viola were great in a movie that was bad. Le'ts speak frankly. I don't even get the makeup award.
78 people have received posthumous nominations (73 if you drop the producers nominated for best picture, which seems fair). The win rate for those nominees is something like 24%.
As for the rest of the discussion, Hopkins is a deserving winner who's performance is his best since Nixon. I think Boseman is equally terrific and the aspersions that would have been cast his way if he HAD won (identity politics, only won because he died) are spurious and toxic.
The movie wasn't bad. It was just too much of a play, it wasn't well converted into a movie.
Thanks for this analysis. A few of us here stuck with Hopkins all season, for the reasons you describe, but we encountered a lot of doubters along the way. I would love to read your analysis of the Best Actress race. I predicted McDormand, but I was far less certain about it.
It also can be tough to sustain momentum as a frontrunner, especially in an Oscar season this long (it's surprising Nomadland did it). Some of these media figures who relentlessly beat the drum for Boseman should consider how much good they did.
Kyle Buchanan was one of the worst offenders of this; he tweeted early in the season that Boseman would almost certainly win the Oscar for Ma Rainey, which made all of the other Oscar predictors run with it, and he's never looked back. He wrote an article about how Hopkins won, with no mention of the role he might have played.
The Little Gold Men crew has been completely dismissive of Hopkins's chances; a few weeks ago, Richard Lawson told listeners that if they were pressed for time, they could skip seeing The Father because it wouldn't win any Oscars (even though, he assured them, it's a good movie!). No surprise that they, like many others, behaved as though a grave injustice were done through the awarding of Best Actor on their post-Oscars episode, rather than considering how and why they got it so wrong.
I am looking up The Father this weekend! Frank Langella must be livid at this though.
On the other hand, I think that had Margot Robbie played Cassie in PYW, she totally would have won the Oscar.
And had Dakota Johnson played Lou in Sound of Metal, she would at least have been nominated.
These things are all about timing for the actors and the right characters.
I’ll join those asking you to do one of these for McDormand. I still don’t understand that win :(
@Lucky: What's to understand? They chose the best actress of the nominated five, the best role in the best movie. McDormand was an obvious choice from the beginning.
You fail at recognizing the not so subtle message the academy sent Sunday: if you are Black and a lead, we will fraud you in supporting where you will sweep without question but if you are a lead, your historic nomination is the win. The gatekeepers did nothing but gatekeep saying how lead is reserved for them and only them, permitting ⚪️actors to continue making history. The backlash is real. Many of us see clearly now and I will never watch the Oscars again. It pains me as an Oscarologist to say that.
Something that hasn't been discussed: The character Chadwick Boseman played was deeply unpleasant, a paradigm of toxic masculinity. A movie/play that should have been about Ma Rainey relegated her to supporting status (perhaps contributing to Viola Davis' loss in her category), and instead focused on unpleasant interactions between unpleasant men. Maybe the character just turned off voters? Obviously, this wasn't Boseman's fault -- he did an excellent job portraying a lousy human being. But Hopkins (and Ahmed) (and Yeun, for that matter) offered complex portrayals of sympathetic men. Boseman's character was one of the most unsympathetic men in major lead roles this year.
The best points, I think, are: 2. Academy Voters Are Not A Sentimental As People Think and 3. Chadwick Boseman Was Not That Famous Outside of America
It's funny how Boseman fans are spitting mad and calling the Academy racist, but I remember when they ignored the sentimental favorite, Peter O'Toole on his final nomination, having never won a competitive award, to give Best Actor to Forest Whitaker, who, in a weird case of reverse category fraud, was actually a supporting player to James McAvoy in that film. It wasn't Boesman's Oscar snatched out of the hands of his grieving widow. The people who are now so mad created that narrative and that expectation, even though none of them had a vote or really thought about how this was likely to play out. It's kind of narcissistic for them to claim "Boseman is a sure thing" and then when he wasn't such a sure thing afterwards, scream "injustice!" instead of "we were wrong." With all the discourse about how good he was, you never really got anyone making the case as to how or in what way he was so good. To me it was a showy technical achievement that promised better things to come, a promise the actor was tragically unable to make good on due to his death. But the discourse was always just: You're a racist if you don't agree with us on an acting award." Or, what a nice gesture it will be. This is not the way to convince the world that Black Lives Matter. Besides, the Black community needs a lot of things. Gestures aren't one of them.
Whitaker was co-lead for the love of God.