Oscar Experts Typing: The supporting actor contenders who could disrupt the top five

Welcome to Oscar Experts Typing, a weekly column in which Gold Derby editors and experts Joyce Eng and Christopher Rosen discuss the Oscar race — via Slack, of course. This week, we discuss Best Supporting Actor, where a top five has firmed up.

Christopher Rosen: Hello, Joyce! It’s Black Friday and while the rest of the world recovers from Thanksgiving dinner by scouring online shopping deals, we’re dutifully typing about the Best Supporting Actor race. It’s not even Dec. 1, but I’m ready to call this one the 2024 version of last year’s Best Supporting Actress race. As you remember, that field was dominated by Da’Vine Joy Randolph once critics groups and industry bodies started giving out statuettes, and not even the presence of two-time Oscar winner Jodie Foster turning in one of her best and most enjoyable performances in years could stop the Randolph train from hitting the Oscar stage. I feel all but certain we will have a repeat of that outcome next year with Kieran Culkin, who should be able to hold off an enjoyable Denzel Washington gunning for Oscar No. 3 by splashing the pot in “Gladiator II.” Even if you’re not willing to look that far into the future, Culkin and Washington feel secure as the top contenders in this race. (Or are they? More on that in an inch or so.) They’ll likely be joined in the category by Guy Pearce in “The Brutalist,” who will be a deserved first-time Oscar nominee as well, and two other newbies to the Oscars race: Yura Borisov for “Anora” and Clarence Maclin for “Sing Sing.” Borisov is the “heart and soul” of Sean Baker’s Cannes winner, and even if he weren’t totally affecting as Igor in the film, I think he’d have a seat at this table as a coattail nominee alongside Mikey Madison. Maclin was once considered a top contender to win here as first-time actor with a great narrative and excellent performance in a beloved film. But some have abandoned ship on Maclin because “Sing Sing” remains the little movie that could but maybe won’t. I haven’t dropped him, however, because A24 hasn’t dropped “Sing Sing” (they’re campaigning it hard) and everyone who sees the movie comes away loving it and Maclin’s work. Those are the consensus five and it feels right — except what if it isn’t? What if Borisov and Maclin aren’t big enough to pull significant votes? What if — here I am, paying off that tease — Washington isn’t Foster but Jack Nicholson in “The Departed”? I’ve seen people compare these two legends and I can’t say I disagree: Washington did the thing (copyright Ariana DeBose) and went for it in a way that kind of delightfully opens up the entire movie. Nicholson did that too and should’ve been nominated for his efforts. But we know he was a famous snub for “The Departed” even though “The Departed” won (too many supporting actors from the movie no doubt hurt his ultimate chances). So maybe Washington isn’t safe either? But then there comes the bigger issue: If not these five guys, who else makes it into the field? Stanley Tucci? Edward Norton? Jonathan Bailey? What do you make of this category and who might lead the bench?

joyceeng: I don’t think it’s much of an issue at all because the Tooch could be an easy coattail if they go HAM on “Conclave” and there’s no consensus on the final spot. Sometimes we get LaKeith Stanfield, other times we get J.K. Simmons. Tucci would obviously be like the latter. Norton is very good in “A Complete Unknown,” but — and this is no shade to anyone — nothing about his or any of the other solid supporting turns had me being like, “Oscar now!” That doesn’t mean he can’t get in since my opinion doesn’t matter, but sometimes good work is just good work, you know? Bailey feels like such a SAG pick who’d miss in the end. I see you’ve just abandoned the mere mention of Jeremy Strong completely. Our CE-bros most likely won’t make it together because #reasons, which is a shame because Strong deserves. But we know it’s not just about quality. Denzel wouldn’t be like Jack because he wouldn’t be missing out to a co-star, not to mention “Gladiator II” doesn’t have any category headaches like “The Departed” had with Leonardo DiCarpio and his obviously lead turn in “Blood Diamond.” Washington also just doesn’t miss once he’s in the thick of it. He’s gotten in for so many no1curr films. His last miss was, ironically, another Ridley Scott joint, “American Gangster,” but he only made the Globes for that. If he hits the Globes and SAG (we know he doesn’t need BAFTA, lolz), you can take it to the bank. Borisov’s quick rise into the top five frustrates and worries me. “Frustrates” because, as you know, I was one of the first Borisov adopters (I got him at 100/1!) and I don’t like it when people copy/paste, especially en masse. “Worries” because it’s such a fast ascent for someone who’s like a iykyk pick. His climb feels like something that would happen in the midst of precursors after he’s already landed in a place or two or got a citation from critics or something. But I suppose this is also due to the lack of alternatives. Samuel L. Jackson‘s still hanging around in the top 10, but “The Piano Lesson” hasn’t exactly set the world on fire. Mark Eydelshteyn is in 10th, but Borisov has become the “Anora” consensus. You once had Peter Sarsgaard in. Adam Pearson ought to be right in the mix, but “A Different Man” has been buried. It is funny how so many of these films have several supporting dudes but none feel strong enough to produce double nominees.

SEE Oscar Experts Typing: Best Supporting Actress is shaping up to be a musical battle

Christopher Rosen: No notes here, even the light shots across my bow. This is why I don’t even want to overthink this all that much. I feel like many pundits were holding space for Norton before “A Complete Unknown” screened and now they will stubbornly keep the light on for him. To be clear, I’m way higher on that movie than you were — it’s easily one of my faves of the year, recency bias be damned — but we agree about Norton and the other supporting performances. Norton should’ve gotten back in for “Glass Onion” anyway. Strong could win in a “normal” race where merit mattered above all. But I’m not gonna predict that anymore. Bailey is funny: He’s got a great scene and some good banter around it, but he doesn’t have all that much to do otherwise in “Wicked.” I do think he can get in at SAG and the old Globes would’ve been all over him (plus, after the Emmys, I assume the Film Twitter wing of the Critics Choice Awards will want to recognize him again). I could see him getting in at the Oscars too: I compared him to John C. Reilly in “Chicago” and while you don’t agree, I think that’s at least the play if you want to convince yourself he could make it in at the Oscars. The thing is: This category is light in strong contenders beyond the top two, so I do think anything is possible if the voters aren’t in love with their options. To be real, I still don’t know how hard to go on “Wicked,” and I fear the precursors we might rely on will be skewed. It does read like “Barbie” to me, however, and so if Ariana Grande is Ryan Gosling, then maybe Bailey is America Ferrera.

joyceeng: But “Dancing Through Life” is not that girl monologue. Ferrera delivered it well, but that monologue did a lot of heavy lifting for her. People ate it up. Meanwhile, people are swooning over Jonny and we know they don’t like nominating hot guys, even less so for just being hot. Fiyero’s material is in Act 2, so hopefully he gets to flex more next year. I would have no problem if he were nominated, but they generally don’t go for these light, fluffy performances in the category. Even Gosling and Reilly had more depth to their characters. I think this comes down to one of our critiques of “Wicked”: We know what’s to come for the supporting characters, and the movie, with its lengthy runtime, could’ve dug deeper and laid the groundwork for the relationships and character dynamics, but it didn’t. Two people we haven’t mentioned yet are Harris Dickinson from “Babygirl” and the internet’s favorite babygirl, Josh O’Connor. You’ve been questioning why no one is acting like the former can happen and you want the latter to happen. Also, four of the top five are nominees at Monday’s Gotham Awards. If it doesn’t go to one of the other six nominees, who do you see winning?

SEE Oscar Experts slugfest: ‘Maria,’ ‘Queer,’ and their nomination potential

Christopher Rosen: A great question: Right now, I’d predict Culkin for the Gotham Awards, with Danielle Deadwyler a dark horse and then Borisov as the alternate. I was actually just going to mention O’Connor too. Why not? I wonder if “Challengers” will have a resurgence as voters are less than enthused by some of the other contenders that have arrived? At the very least, Phil’s Tire Town should host an influencer screening.

joyceeng: O’Connor also feels like someone who could hit precursors but come up short in the end. But I truly don’t understand why there has been zero Dunkin’-Patrick Zweig spon con on my feed. Let me run this campaign.