It’s here! Oscars weekend! Despite the exclamation marks, I’m honestly ready for this awards season to be over; can we move the Oscars back to February please? Talk about burnout.

And this is coming from someone who hasn’t seen all the nominated pictures (I’m no Kirsten Dunst, sorry).

Anyway, the most exciting race this year isn’t Best Picture (probably One Battle After Another? No?), this year it’s the acting categories that are bringing the excitement – specifically the award for Best Actor.

Not to downplay the importance of the other award categories, but the acting races are generally the ones Joe Public are interested in, and given it’s Joe Public who watches the Oscars ceremony and buys the tickets at cinemas (both in dwindling numbers), it makes sense that it’s the acting nominees that you see hosting SNL, running the talk-show circuits and taking part in every relevant (and irrelevant) podcasts during awards season. You don’t generally catch writers or cinematographers on Hot Ones (more’s the pity).

Jessie Buckley pretty much has Best Actress in the bag for her performance in Hamnet; she’s swept the precursors, nabbing a BAFTA, Actor (SAG, let’s be real), Critics’ Choice and Golden Globe. Only Rose Byrne seems to really have any chance of dethroning her, having also picked up a Globe (the Golden Globes split their acting awards into separate categories for drama and comedy/musical (though not for supporting roles which honestly just screams killjoy)).

Meanwhile it would be a travesty if Sean Penn doesn’t win Best Supporting Actor for One Battle After Another, and whilst Best Supporting Actress seems a little bit more open, Amy Madigan will probably walk away with the gong for her role in Weapons.

Which leaves Best Actor. What a race.

At the top I mentioned that I’ve not seen all the nominated movies, but I have seen all the Best Actor nominated performances. So let’s look at who could, who should and who will win the coveted Oscar this weekend.

 

Michael B Jordan – Sinners

As Actor award winner, Michael B Jordan is arguably the current frontrunner. The Actors are generally seen as one of the biggest indicators of success at the Oscars largely due to SAG-AFTRA members making up the largest voting bloc in the Academy, resulting in a lot of overlap over the years. Regardless, Jordan gives a solid performance in Sinners and a win would almost certainly be well-received. But is it really an Oscar-winning performance?

Ryan Coolger’s vampire-gangster Sinners takes place in 1930s Mississippi. Jordan plays the dual-role of twin brothers – Elijah and Elias Moore – or Smoke and Stack as they are better known – who are back in town after spending time with the mob in Chicago; they now have money and a plan to open a juke joint.

Part of what makes Jordan’s performance so interesting is that he’s playing two characters. Smoke and Stack have contrasting personalities and it is certainly fun to watch Jordan interact with himself on screen (thanks to impressive camera trickery) and bring two different characters to life.

But – here’s the issue. It almost doesn’t matter that Jordan gives a stellar performance because the movie does everything it can to make it blindingly obvious that these are two different people regardless of any nuance Jordan brings to the roles. They’re colour coded for goodness’ sake! When they share screentime, Smoke is moody, Stack is smiling. It’s a little on the nose and does a disservice to Jordan’s performance. (The colour coding I can overlook a touch, because ‘symbolism’). His performance is also hampered by Sinners’ storyline – he can shine in the first half of the movie, but as the second act descends into your more typical blockbuster fare, so does his performance.

Sinners is a great movie but it’s the script, visuals and atmosphere – supported by a very strong ensemble cast – that makes it great. Jordan is riding a wave of goodwill – he’s a likeable, charismatic actor who has been putting out some stellar performances the last few years – a win is highly likely, and I doubt anyone would be upset, but would it be considered an all-time great? Probably not.

 

Leonardo DiCaprio – One Battle After Another

The problem with Leonardo DiCaprio is that he doesn’t really put out any bad performances – and when you’re as good an actor as he is, it’s easy to get Oscar-nominated.

Playing middle-aged, burnt-out former revolutionary Bob Ferguson, DiCaprio stumbles around in a bathrobe for much of the film in a desperate (and honestly, funny) attempt to rescue his kidnapped daughter (Chase Infiniti, robbed of a nomination).

DiCaprio does give a great performance in One Battle After Another; he’s chaotic, stoned, funny, desperate – a nice full spectrum of emotion, but he’s probably not going to win the Oscar. This is largely because you could imagine other actors of his calibre churning out – replace him with Joaquin Phoenix for example, and we probably wouldn’t even notice.

In another year he might be a front-runner but – not dissimilar to Michael B Jordan in Sinners – he is simply another great aspect of an overall great film. Sean Penn is the standout performer here (rightly nominated for Best Supporting Actor) which in a way, detracts from DiCaprio’s output a little – he’s not even the best actor in his own film.

A nomination is surely as good as it gets for DiCaprio this year.

 

Ethan Hawke – Blue Moon

Unlike the other films in this category, Richard Linklater’s Blue Moon isn’t up for Best Picture and nobody’s upset (though Linklater’s other 2025 movie Nouvelle Vague has been totally snubbed). In fact, other than Hawke’s Best Actor nom, the only other prize Blue Moon is up for is Best Original Screenplay for Robert Kaplow (thoroughly deserved).

Not that you need your movie to be Best Picture nominated (Brendan Fraser won for The Whale as recently as 2022), but it certainly helps.

Hawke plays Broadway legend Lorenz Hart, the pre-Hammerstein partner of Richard Rodgers, who is struggling with alcoholism and mental health as he tries to save face during the opening night of Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Oklahoma! The movie – a cute little 100-minute affair – takes place in one location and plays out pretty much in real time. It feels more like a play than a movie – had you told me Hawke was reprising his Tony-winning performance I would have believed you entirely.

There is absolutely no denying that Ethan Hawke gives a wonderful performance – he is locked in from beginning to end: flamboyant, narcissistic, absolutely nailing that 1930s patter and practically working through a 90-minute monologue. However, it isn’t good enough to win an Oscar. Why? Because his portrayal feels too much like a performance. Lorenz Hart never really feels like a real person but a caricature – and sure, Hart himself is putting on a performance for his buddies at the bar, but there’s something too theatrical and big (ironic, given he’s playing 5-foot-tall) about the whole thing. Everything is sign-posted and obvious – even when things are supposed to be subtle, they’re obviously subtle (no, it doesn’t make sense but roll with me).

I like that Hawke has been nominated because the commitment to the role is something to be admired, not once does he drop the character, but it is ultimately an imperfect performance.

 

Timothée Chalamet – Marty Supreme

Ugh. I really don’t want to talk about Timothée ‘I hate opera and ballet’ Chalamet.

Never have I wanted a deserving actor to lose the Oscar more. And to be honest, it is probably his to lose.

Let’s be real: Chalamet gives a great performance in Marty Supreme. He’s loud, annoying, unlikeable…and so’s his character (drumroll). Seriously, he’s good in Marty Supreme, adding an intense physicality to his table tennis scenes that brings an extra layer to the performance. It would be a deserving win and until recently, I’d probably have been rooting for him to take the prize.

But has anyone sabotaged their own chances as much as Chalamet? (I mean, Will Smith comes close but I guess he’d technically won before slapping Chris Rock). I’m not talking about Chalamet’s likeability because he isn’t the first (and likely won’t be the last) actor to out themselves as a moron/douchebag/uncultured loser. No, I mean the ridiculous braggadocio and bratty ‘persona’ he adopted for the Marty Supreme press tour and following awards campaign. All this does – other than giving everyone a collective ick – is make me think that Chalamet wasn’t really acting all that much in the movie. And are we really going to award someone the most coveted industry prize for being themselves? The award is for best actor – dude’s not even acting.

The promotional stuff I could overlook. A24, Marty Supreme’s distributor are known for their unorthodox promotional campaigns (the New Yorker runs a great, piece on this), but things like claiming he’s delivered some “…really, really committed, top-of-the-line performances” over the last few years don’t get a pass (seriously, I watched Wonka, and Dune).

It’s a shame because Marty Supreme is a fun film that I really enjoyed and would totally recommend but Chalamet has gone and soured all good sentiment. I’ve never wanted someone to lose so badly.

But…incidentally, regardless of how vapid Chalamet has turned out to be – he actually isn’t the best actor in the category. That moniker goes to…

 

Wagner Moura – The Secret Agent

Without a doubt, Wanger Moura delivers the finest acting performance of the five nominees.

Set in 1970s Brazil, mid-way through a 21-year military dictatorship, Moura plays Armando a widower, professor, oh and enemy of the state who has two hitmen on his tail. He goes underground, living in a safe house and using a fake name, until he can get a passport for himself and his son to flee Brazil.

Much like Michael B Jordan, Moura’s performance involves a dual-role, both figuratively (he’s a professor fleeing political persecution and living under an alias – of course he’s playing a role) and literally (I shan’t spoil the ending), in what is a genuinely brilliant slow-burn, 70s-style thriller – (go see it, even if you don’t speak Portuguese you’ll enjoy (unless you’re Timothée Chalamet, I imagine)).

What elevates Moura’s performance above those of his fellow nominees is the layered performance that he gives. Whilst Chalamet’s is a showier performance, the character of Marty doesn’t really have much depth (much like his actor); Marty says and does what he wants, there’s little nuance or intrigue – I can’t think of a single scene where I thought ‘I wonder what he’s thinking right now’.

Moura on the other hand, seems to live for the subtext. So much is unspoken and merely hinted at that by the time we reach the movie’s turning point (an interrogation scene where we learn exactly why he’s living in a safehouse under a fake name) and he unleashes a cold but calm fury, you truly believe that this man, with his laid-back manner and sad eyes, would and could bash someone’s brains in with a mallet as he claims.

Where Ethan Hawke’s performance is constrained to one location, one night, one overarching feeling – Moura’s is given freedom; we see fear, tension, joy, anger, sadness. And though Leonardo DiCaprio is the leading man in his movie on paper, there are long periods with other characters where his absence isn’t missed – Moura is undoubtedly the main character in his film.

And whilst Michael B Jordan’s dual characters are more pronounced, the different roles Wagner Moura plays in The Secret Agent are distinct and showcase completely different aspects of his acting wheelhouse.

This year’s Best Actor line-up really is one of the most interesting we’ve seen in a long time and with the precursor awards not offering any kind of clear-cut winner, you could argue it’s anyone’s to win.

 

The predictable win would be Chalamet, and sure, he’d probably deserve it. The Academy may want to reward Jordan who is likely the ‘safe bet’ for anxious voters – him winning would be generally well-received and wouldn’t upset too many people. DiCaprio and Hawke would both be worthy winners though it does seem unlikely that either are really getting more to celebrate than a nomination. But for me, for delivering the best acting performance of the five, it simply has to be Wagner Moura.