Almost There: Donald Sutherland in "Ordinary People"
Monday, March 16, 2020 at 11:18PM 
Donald Sutherland is one of those actors who seem to be Oscar nominees even if they're not. Like Mia Farrow or John Goodman, Sutherland has been in so many awarded productions that he feels like the sort of person who should have the words "Academy Award nominee" appear before his name in trailers. He's almost an institution of American Cinema, his filmography full of historically important titles such as MASH and Klute. To think such a respected actor is still without an Oscar nomination is slightly inconceivable, but the lack of accolades never shocked Donald Sutherland himself.
In 1980, he was the only main actor of Best Picture-winner Ordinary People to be ignored by the Academy. When asked about the snub, he said: "I'm not surprised. I know that community and I didn't expect a nomination." That doesn't mean he didn't deserve one…
Because of its fearsome competition, Robert Redford's Ordinary People is usually considered among the great robberies in Oscar history. Some of that outrage is understandable when we remember it won best Picture against Martin Scorsese's Raging Bull and David Lynch's The Elephant Man. However, it would be unfair to say this drama about grief is a terrible winner. In the subgenre of suburban tragedies starring upper-class families, it's is certainly better than another Best Picture winner in the same mold. In any case, it's not a perfect masterpiece.
The direction is somewhat heavy-handed when it comes to the use of music and overt symbolism, its views on depression and psychotherapy are a bit schematic. What it has going for it is an uncomfortable level of emotional brutality that never seems inauthentic, not even when the script breaks some metaphorical plates and has characters comment on it. There's also the fact that Redford is a formidable director of actors, giving them leeway to contradict the written characterizations and explore contrasting registers that still feel cohesive.
As Conrad Jarrett, Timothy Hutton gives an Oscar-winning performance of inchoate despair. The suicidal teen who lost his older brother in a boating accident is a live wire in human form, as prone to petrifying blankness as he is to explosions of mean-spirited provocation. Mary Tyler Moore plays his cold mother, a woman ravaged by loss who, like Conrad, unconsciously chooses to feel nothing instead of dealing with the pain of her son's death. Though, unlike him, her emptiness manifests as pathologic aloofness. The actress received a well-deserved Oscar nomination for her troubles.
If Hutton is fire and Moore is ice, Sutherland plays an undefined ever-mutable element trying to keep the peace between the two warring titans. He is Calvin Jarrett, the patriarch and unwilling mediator, a man who deals with loss by pretending everything is fine and trying to return to the normalcy of pre-tragedy life. His efforts are void, of course, for grief is a cancer for which there is little treatment. During endless dinner scenes, we see how this father tries to fill the silence with inane conversation, getting little feedback from his companions, though his eyes keep jumping from son to wife in hopes of getting a reaction.
When Conrad laughs at a bad joke Calvin muttered, it's like a miracle and it's difficult not to feel heartbroken at how happy Sutherland looks for a single instant. This is a performance made of such moments, little flashes of ravaged humanity. Look at the way his stony gaze makes an airplane travel look like the funeral procession for a dead marriage or how he acts like a soldier walking through a minefield whenever he's alone talking to Conrad. The approach to this character couldn't be more fitting for the film he's in since Ordinary People is a drama where we learn more from what the characters refuse to say than from what they verbalize, more from what they hide than from what they show.
Sutherland paints us a picture of lost familial happiness by trying to cover the scars of domestic apocalypse, he telegraphs the ineffectiveness of these attempts, underlines the futility of Calvin's agonizing struggle. His arc in this story is the admittance of failure, the acceptance that he can't cope, that he's angry and sad, that he's lost. In a way, it's easy to understand his lack of Oscar nomination. Calvin Jarrett is a role that needs to be purposefully underplayed in order to work. His only big scenes, which come late in the narrative, are all about Calvin explaining away his family, those he understands better than anyone. First to a psychiatrist, then to his wife and finally to his son. Through these quasi-soliloquies, Sutherland appears to do very little, though his accomplishment is monumental, saying a lot with minimal fanfare.
For example, it's easy to imagine the conversation with his spouse coming off as antagonistic, but Sutherland swallows his words. He's not saying she's a monster, he's rationalizing the feelings that aren't there, the void left by tragedy and the frailty of their union. He doesn't play it as an attack towards her but as a declaration of defeat. Because of that, there's no triumph at the end of the film, simply a sight full of ragged pain and a sobbed promise of parental love. Ordinary People isn't about a horrible mother needing to be excised from the family. It's about traumatized people needing to say out loud that they're in pain and they need help, that they can't do it alone.
Reader Comments (31)
It is a fantastic performance, deep and richly nuanced.
It seems incredible now that he was bypassed but the nominations were wonky that year. He clearly belonged in Timothy Hutton's spot in Supporting Actor or perhaps Judd Hirsch's but either way Hutton belonged in Lead Actor. While Sutherland is an important component in the film the story's thrust is between Conrad (who is undeniably the main character) and his mother Beth.
I am delighted Sutherland finally received an Honorary but would be happy to see him win a competitive Oscar some day.
Allegedly, Sutherland did do the confrontation scene with Moore differently- louder and showier with tears and all that. After the shot, Redford asked for another take and Sutherland was upset- "I gave you everything!" "I know," said Redford. Sutherland realized that less was needed and did the take again. That is what appears in the movie.
Also, I still can't believe that Lionsgate couldn't get any traction for supporting actor for the Hunger Games. Those were weak years and Sutherland could've played the veteran card that so many play during awards season.
claudio, thanks again for a smart write-up. sutherland certainly should have gotten the nomination rather than judd hirsch. among many triumphs in the movie, sutherland and mary tyler moore (who is extraordinary here) really make you believe they're a married couple, even if it was "wrong" from the start. you believe they would have found each other and tried to make a life together. in this movie, you feel sutherland being the peacemaker, trying to modulate to everyone's expectations of him, and really trying to make things right. you see his character expanding his understanding of what love is. it's such smart acting. nice to see him get featured in this column.
Excellent article (and such a great film... I agree, Sutherland gives a magnificent performance)
Sutherland SHOULD have been nominated for Best Actor. As for the film - I saw it 5 times and loved it every time. Sure I cried a lot by the end but it is beautifully acted and written. I haven't seen Raging Bull so can't comment if that was better but I did see Elephant Man and I consider that film one of the best in history.
Yes, he shld've been nom, but who wld u swop him w among the best actor nominees?
I believe he campaigned under Lead, which seems fair, since he is as much a co-lead as MTM.
@Tom G, thx for the trivia! Makes one wonder had the showier, louder scene been kept, wld he hav gotten in? 🤔
The Academy r all abt showy, tear jerking performances, so perhaps his superb, naunced turn din impress the actors branch.
Actually naturalism n subtlety r so much harder to pull off than being loud n showy. But alas they r hardly rewarded 😕
1980 was an incredibly strong year in the Best Actor category. DeNiro gives one of the best performances in the history of cinema; John Hurt is incredible and iconic; Duvall gives one of his top 2-3 performances, which saying a lot; O’Toole is amazing in what may be my favorite of his performances (it’s really close with Lion in Winter, for me); and Lemmon is as moving and engaging as ever in Tribute. In retrospect, I think Sutherland was 6th and, if it were me, 30 years later, with the benefit of time, I’d put him in Lennon’s spot. It’s probably Sutherland’s best work in a wonderful career.
I must be the only one who things PRIDE AND PREJUDICE is his best role.
I'll echo that this is an incredible performance and such a great film as well.
I'd say the film deserved three lead acting nominations for Moore, Hutton, and Sutherland.
I'd put this 3rd on the list of nominations he deserved:
3. Ordinary People
2. Invasion of the Body Snatchers
1. Klute (playing next to one of the greatest performances of all time, his work is so pitch-perfect, allowing Fonda to shine)
Tom G.: Except his turn in The Hunger Games is probably Sutherland's worst performance...ever? It's Sutherland at his unconvincing smarmiest. So...Yeah, I'm gonna go with that. Career worst work. As for a weak year where he might have justifiably played the veteran card to muscle in? I'm gonna say 2003, specifically for The Italian Job remake. (Yes, Cold Mountain is a (slightly) better movie, but Sutherland has NOTHING to work with in it.) Craziest miss, though? The Academy looking at the huge ensemble of JFK and singling out Tommy Lee Jones' worst in show cameo gay joke as opposed to Sutherland or, even, (to name 3 other, at least solid, picks) John Candy, Gary Oldman or Joe Pesci.
Volvagia, I'm going to disagree with you. The role itself was not writtern very well, but Sutherland's performance in "Outbreak" is so completely one-note everytime he was on screen I was jolted out of the movie. In "Hunger Games", I feel like he tried to give it a little shading, and it wasn't as over-the-top as "Outbreak" was.
Sutherland deserved the nomination and MTM deserved the win. An astonishing duet.
Timothy Hutton is like Tatum O'Neal. Deserved to be nominated AND win in lead, but the Academy would never have the guts.
One of my all-time favorite performances - and yes, even better than De Niro IMO.
Wonder what he meant by "that community"?
He is wonderful in this infact everyone is and for Jack Lemmon in Tribute which is awful and a real waste of a nomination
I know it's not considered cool but OP is a film I return to more than Raging Bull.
I couldn't disagree more! Ordinary People is a masterpiece. Superb acting all around. Sutherland should have been nominated. Happy the film won Best Picture.
Ordinary People maybe is not a Masterpiece and is not Raging Bull, but it’s still better than many Best Picture winners. Yep, Sutherland was unfairly overlooked, especially considering that they put the real leading man, Hutton, in the supporting category so the internal competition was not a problem. It’s strange that in a such long and appreciated film journey the Academy was so cold with him through the years but frankly it happened quite often with so many respected thespians and luckily that Honorary Oscar fixed the problem, at least partially
How in the hell did the Oscars not nominate him for that performance is beyond me. He wasn't de Niro but still, it was a great performance. He was the one I found myself drawn to as Donald Sutherland killed it. One notable scene is where he's jogging and the flashback montage as he suddenly falls as he's starting to realize that there's so many things that is wrong with his family. Then he talks to Judd Hirsch and thus comes these revelations about Buck's funeral and everything else. Especially his marriage to MTM as he becomes concerned for his son and he's starting to confront the fact that not everything is alright. MTM is in denial and he is like "it's over". I like the way father and son ended the movie as it is clear that they'll be fine and maybe figure out how to cook and such. Plus go to therapy together.
He was amazing in PRIDE AND PREJUDICE. His teary eyed speech at the end to Keira Knightley is beautiful.
I saw the film recently and it has aged very well- the performances are all great but Timothy Hutton really deserved his Oscar
Sutherland and Tommy Lee Jones (Coal Miner's Daughter) were robbed that year. I'd bump O'Toole (annoying) and Lemmon (underwhelming) from the Best Actor lineup.
Its hard to express how important this movie is to me and how it touched me at a time when I was trying to figure out a lot about my relationship with my distant mother and grasping father. I'd like to think that now Conrad would be reconciled and forgives her for her inability to love him. I know that happened with me. Sutherland's was the least of the performances to me when I was younger but as they years have passed (40 of them, holy fuck!), his work has deepened and yes, its a shame he's never received even a single nomination. Thanks for this great write up!
Sutherland should have been nominated and I like and have rewatched the film more than you Cláudio. was undeniable to the academy that year even if I thought Hutton, Sutherland and Hurt were all better choices for Leading Actor.
I love this movie and perhaps may be in the minority but I prefer it over Raging Bull. The latter may be better directed but Ordinary People moves me deeply every time I see it. All of the performances are rich and deserving of attention. Hutton is category fraud but wow what a performance. Sutherland is the perfect balance to both Hutton and Moore. I will always defend this movie as a worthy Oscar winner.
@Bgk
I will always love Ordinary People and defend it as well. It's one of my favorite films, really important to me on a deeply personal level. I never appreciated until relatively recently how good Donald Sutherland is in it (I was always too busy being blown away by Timothy Hutton and MTM). His performance is subtle and completely convincing - you see him trying ever-so-timidly to navigate what Claudio so aptly describes as the "fire and ice" of his son and wife, and slowly realizing that he no longer can. It's so powerful.
I am on board with the Ordinary People bandwagon. It's such a terrific Best Picture winner. Raging Bull is a masterpiece, but doesn't say as much about humanity as this movie does, and boy does it. I will always say MTM should have won the Oscar. And Sutherland is brilliant in this. His work is the crucial linchpin between two stunning actors. A perfect acting trio.
One more time, I completelly disagree.
"Ordinary People" is supperb, a flawless movie and one of best dramas ever made.
I love Ordinary People also. But it breaks my heart, that Timothy Huton belongs in Lead, which would be a completly deserving Winner, but would he win over DeNiro? I would love that, but is it Right?
I think the Winners should be:
Picture. Ordinary People
Director: Martin Scorsese, Raging Butt
Actor: Robert DeNiro, Raging Bull (Hutton, nominated in Lead)
Actress: Gena Rowlands Gloria*
Supp. Actor. Donald Sutherland, Ordinary People
Supp. Actress: Mary Tyler Moore, Ordiniary People
*I am between Rowlands and Sissy Spacek. a very dificult dicision for me, Both are so great! MTM for me, belong sin supporting, but either way, she sould have won!
What are you thinking bout it?
This is my favorite movie of all time by a mile. The way Redford with his beautifully crafted style of revealing the various subtle gestures and expressions capture the essence of characters much more deeply than words can.
The stand out performance for me is Mary Tyler Moore 's portrayal of the very complex role of Beth, Conrad's mother. MTM slayed this role with her soul exposed as raw and hollow. You are so intimately familiar with Beth's psyche that you actually ache watching her slowly become naked and ashamed. She reveals an honesty in her vulnerability .
Donald Sutherland had the best performance by a male either lead or as in the movie , supporting role.
Timothy Hutton was phenomenal as well and deserved the awards absolutely. Just need to note that Donald was not acting in his performance as Calvin, Conrad's powerful yet tender and guilt ridden Father.
His masterfully crafted portrayal of Calvin demonstrates just how gifted Sutherland truly is as an actor and stole the show .
This movie is a masterful work of art that reveals the unordinary in the ordinary.