Why was Barry Fitzgerald nominated for Best Actor & Best Supporting Actor for the same role?
- Thread starter Voight
- Start date
Paramount pulled a fast one to ensure both leading and supporting would be locked up no matter what. Hence the rule change.
Both actors were far too strong to be beat by anyone else that year it seemed (McDavid and Draisaitl like).
Additional interesting facts:
"Despite the vagueness of the issue, the Academy did jump into action to ensure that this kind of thing could never happen again. They dumped the problem on the studios, with a rule change that required them to take ownership of selecting which categories their actors would fit into.
This indirectly posed a new opportunity for studios when promoting their films, and only further highlighted the confusion over the difference between a 'supporting' role and a 'leading' role. Going forward, studios would promote their actors in categories where they felt they had the best shot. This is why Tatum O'Neal would win for Best Supporting Actress for Paper Moon, even though she appears in practically every scene. And it would be why Anthony Hopkins would win for Silence of the Lambs, when his character seemed like more of a supporting role."
Both actors were far too strong to be beat by anyone else that year it seemed (McDavid and Draisaitl like).
Additional interesting facts:
"Despite the vagueness of the issue, the Academy did jump into action to ensure that this kind of thing could never happen again. They dumped the problem on the studios, with a rule change that required them to take ownership of selecting which categories their actors would fit into.
This indirectly posed a new opportunity for studios when promoting their films, and only further highlighted the confusion over the difference between a 'supporting' role and a 'leading' role. Going forward, studios would promote their actors in categories where they felt they had the best shot. This is why Tatum O'Neal would win for Best Supporting Actress for Paper Moon, even though she appears in practically every scene. And it would be why Anthony Hopkins would win for Silence of the Lambs, when his character seemed like more of a supporting role."
The Academy is really a collection of members, so it could be that nominations back then were determined similarly to how the NHL determines the finalist for awards, simply by the number of votes received. I doubt that any single member voted for Fitzgerald for both Best Actor and Best Supporting Actor. It could've even been against the rules to do so, but the voters as a whole may've been split on which category to put him into and he just happened to get enough votes to put him into the top 5 of both.
