Al Pacino's performance as Michael Corleone in the first two Godfather movies is widely recognized as one of the greatest performances in cinema history. Pacino was nominated for Best Supporting Actor for playing Corleone in the original Godfather, but he lost to Joel Grey for his performance in Cabaret. In between both Godfathers Pacino was nominated for Best Actor for Serpico, but he lost to Jack Lemmon for Save the Tiger. After two nominations, you would think that the Academy would have given Pacino the Oscar for The Godfather Part II. That film was particularly successful at the 1975 Oscars, winning six awards in total compared to the original movie's three wins in 1973. Pacino's co-star Robert De Niro won the Best Supporting Actor Oscar, but Pacino lost to Art Carney for his performance in Harry and Tonto.
I admit that I am unfamiliar with Carney's work. In the 1970s he was a popular comedian and TV star who was most well-known for his role in the 1950s sitcom The Honeymooners. I am sure that Carney was a capable actor, but why did he win the Oscar over Pacino? Harry and Tonto is rarely talked about today, in contrast to The Godfather Part II which continues to be a favorite of audiences around the world. Was Carney's win an example of a "legacy" win where the Academy gives a veteran actor an Oscar as a kind of lifetime achievement award even if other actors are more deserving that year? Or did the Academy have something against Pacino in particular? Pacino boycotted the 1973 Oscars and he publicly criticized the Academy's decision to nominate him for Supporting Actor rather than Best Actor that year, so I wonder if the Academy deliberately snubbed him in 1975 out of spite.
Be the first to comment
Nobody's responded to this post yet.
Add your thoughts and get the conversation going.