Oscar Week: Why Leonardo DiCaprio Has Never Deserved an Oscar (and Shouldn't Want One)
by Liam Bland
The annual wailing has begun to annoy me now. As each awards season rolls around, so begins the bleating of Leonardo DiCaprio groupies at the injustice of the Academy ‘not giving Leo his Oscar’. I’m sorry, but he has never deserved one.
That is not to say that he isn’t a damn good actor, he showed this potential in strong early roles such as What’s Eating Gilbert Grape? and The Basketball Diaries. These are two great performances for a young actor, despite the rest of his film output in the 1990s otherwise consisting of primarily teen-bait trash (I include both Romeo and Juliet and Titanic in this list) and that I found Leo himself, and his self-designated ‘pussy posse’, to be absolutely loathsome during this period.
Since 2000 onwards, DiCaprio’s film choices, which must have been easier to dictate after becoming an established A-list star, and his subsequent performances, have improved drastically. The Beach, though no showpiece of particularly impressive acting, demonstrated a knack for spotting a challenging subject, at least from the original source material. Collaborating on the boisterous Catch Me If You Can and attempting to portray a less savoury character in Gangs of New York were more progressive acting choices and DiCaprio’s determination to be recognised as an actor of substance can be noted from The Departed through to his powerful cameo in Django Unchained.
However, of the performances for which he was nominated Best Actor, none of them have been of high enough quality to earn him an Oscar. Martin Scorcese’s biopic of Howard Hughes, The Aviator, was cinematically beautiful but lightweight and frivolous; neither the subject nor the performance was challenging enough to trouble the eventual winner, Jamie Foxx for his portrayal of the life of the legendary blues singer Ray Charles.
Leo’s choices of lead roles in biopics and period-piece films, so often a rich hunting ground for actors seeking Oscars, was not to bring him those rewards either. The Great Gatsby was grandiose and resplendent but the central themes of the original, the corruption and degradation of The American Dream, were left untouched, with DiCaprio’s Gatsby embodying the charm but lacking the mysterious allure of the eponymous protagonist of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s American classic. However, I would apportion the lion’s share of the blame for The Great Gatsby’s failings to the director Baz Luhrmann and his unswerving devotion to style over content.
J Edgar was a prime opportunity for DiCaprio to portray one of America’s more intriguingly divisive political figures but, uninspiringly, the film chose to adopt a sympathetic focus on the notorious former FBI Director’s social limitations and his issues of repressed sexuality, whilst omitting all but the slightest suggestion of the cross-dressing which was, reportedly, how Hoover’s sexual proclivities manifested. More damagingly to both the film and the role, it also completely sidesteps Hoover’s insidious attacks upon the civil rights movements in the US or how his fear of Communism and ties with Joseph McCarthy created much of the injustice and fear associated with the Second Red Scare.
For me, DiCaprio’s most noteworthy lead role performance to date was in Blood Diamond. Finally (or so it seems to me) he threw off the restraint of being likeable and pretty on camera and the amoral, mercenary character he creates is one of his most believable and human performances. He would still not receive a Best Actor plaudit in 2006, due to being surpassed by Forest Whitaker, whose portrayal of the brutal and conflicted Ugandan dictator Idi Amin in The Last King of Scotland was immense.
The braying of the DiCaprio sycophants reached its crescendo last year, as the Leophytes threw their faeces at The Academy for having the temerity to deny Leo his sacred golden figurine yet again. However, his performance in The Wolf of Wall Street is, to my mind, the least deserving of DiCaprio’s nominations to date. His acting is adequate but uninspiring, as is the film. Seemingly it tries to emulate the wit and introspection of Goodfellas but fails to capture any of the cult gangster film’s depth and cynicism, and instead plays out like a three-hour version of The Hangover. Even dismissing the indulgent limitations of the film itself DiCaprio would still not have won, as his also-nominated peers all outshone him; Matthew McConaughey’s winning turn in The Dallas Buyer’s Club, Chiwatel Ejiofor’s harrowing 12 Years a Slave and Christian Bale’s fraudster in American Hustle all demonstrated far superior, nuanced performances. The one redeeming feature of The Woeful of Wall Street was Jonah Hill’s film-stealing comic performance.
With the 2016 Academy Awards almost upon us the clamour of online campaigning has begun again in earnest, this time for DiCaprio’s lead in Alejandro G. Iñárritu’s bear-wrangling survival-fest The Revenant. His fans insist that, surely this time, the role and the hardships he endured filming it must finally ensure him his rightful academy award. And perhaps it will, I’ve not seen The Revenant yet, nor its competitors, so I cannot argue their comparative merits.
The only time that I think DiCaprio had a valid claim on an Oscar was the Best Supporting Actor nomination he received for What’s Eating Gilbert Grape? Yet, even with his delicate portrayal of Jonny Depp’s mentally retarded younger brother Arnie he should probably have still lost out due to Ralph Fiennes’ powerhouse performance as Commandant Amon Goeth in Schindler’s List. As it was, neither won, the award that year inexplicably going to Tommy Lee Jones in The Fugitive, for his portrayal of, well, Tommy Lee Jones…
And here lies my final issue, one which we are all aware of; that Oscars are not awarded on merit. They no longer represent the highest level of commendation, by the leading lights of the industry, conferred to the most worthy recipient of the year. Past controversies have highlighted the politicking and bribery which have, in favour of preferred and political academy choices, denied recognition to such undeniably wonderful performances as Peter O’Toole’s Lawrence of Arabia or Glenn Close’s in Dangerous Liaisons.
I would support a campaign to remove campaigning, both industry and public, from Oscar selections. It is supposed to be The Academy’s award, not the people’s choice, but for the Oscars to hold any value the Academy must have integrity, and these days the currency of the Oscars are as devalued as the Nobel Peace Prize. They are acquired, bribed, and bought through elaborate publicity campaigns by the studios and actors. They are the banker’s bonuses of the film world.
The Oscars are shit.
And DiCaprio can do better.