Who Gets to Be Exceptional?
On January 4, Timothee Chalamet accepted the award for Best Actor at the 2026 Critics’ Choice Movie Awards. Because Critics’ Choice winners often shape Oscar momentum, the ceremony plays a major role in determining which performances are seen as legitimate Oscar contenders for the rest of the award season. Chalamet’s win sparked online debates about whether he deserved his win or not. His viral promotional movie campaign for Marty Supreme created a cult fan base, causing some to say he is the best actor of our generation. On the other hand, his campaign alienated others who began to believe his acting performance did not justify his new braggadocious campaign persona.
Online discourse around Chalamet’s win focuses less around the award itself and instead focuses on what his recognition represents. Chalamet’s campaign generated audience enthusiasm and expectations. Some even began to claim he is the best actor of the current generation, while some critics argue that his braggadocious film campaign overshadows the performance and creates an entitled personality. This has caused comparisons with Michael B. Jordan’s role in Sinners, which was loved by audience members for its cultural impact depth, but faced hushed praise from critics. Critics’ reactions of Sinners was notably different from Marty Supreme. As the Oscars approach, and many predictions for the Best Actor Award begin, many have started to reexamine the double standard in Hollywood between black and white actors, and who gets to be known as “one of the greats”.
Chalamet’s Marty Supreme and Jordan’s Sinners are two distinct movies, both in story and cultural significance. Sinners makes a cultural statement on Black history, colonialism, and assimilation, while Marty Supreme tells the tale of an ambitious ping pong player who fights by any means necessary to meet global acclaim. Historically, Hollywood has rewarded movies with more surface-level storytelling, instead of films with nuance, that are unafraid to make a controversial statement on current society. This can be seen with the Oscars overlooking the critically acclaimed, The Last Black Man in San Francisco (2019). This movie was praised by critics and audience members, but overlooked by major award committees.
In a 2025 People.com article, Chalamet stated that he trained for years to be able to mimic Marty Mauser’s playing style,training with professionals while working on different movie sets. But despite Marty Mauser having a 1950s New York accent, Chalamet did not adopt the accent. For Sinners, Jordan worked with Beth McGuire, a famous dialect coach, to create a historically accurate accent for the twins of Sinners. Jordan was tasked with playing twins and creating a nuanced separation between the two characters. He played a role in costume and character development of his characters. Despite the comparable hard work and dedication both actors put into their roles, Chalamet’s received more media attention than Jordan’s. Jordan’s efforts were seen as expected, while Chalamet’s are viewed as remarkable. This difference in coverage shows how Black actors are significantly undervalued compared to white actors.
The box office numbers of the two movies have also been a major topic of discussion. Marty Supreme is reported to have become A24’s largest opening weekend. On opening day it made $9.5 million domestically. Sinners made approximately $19.2 million on its opening day. Though art cannot be measured by box office numbers, these figures can represent a movie’s popularity, rewatchability, and demand. Though both movies were profitable in their own right, critic reviews have not always reflected that. In the wake of Sinners success, Variety, in a now deleted-article, questioned the legitimacy of box office sales after Sinners’ grand opening weekend, while Marty Supreme’s debut was seen as revolutionary and a groundbreaking step up in Chalamet’s career. The contrast represents how films with Black actors, even when successful, are more likely to face unwarranted scrutiny, while the work of white actors are praised for having less credit.
Shortly after Chalamet’s win, Sinners fans took to the internet to express their outrage. This debate soon became a discussion about racial inequality in the entertainment industry. Sinners’ defenders claimed Jordan’s performance was more nuanced, impactful, and deserving. While Marty Supreme fans argued that Chalamet has a generational talent, claiming Marty Supreme is Chalamet’s magnus opus. This debate shows how the media impacts audience perception and reinforces racial stereotypes in Hollywood and current media.
The media presents Chalamet as deserving of this award. The media has praised Chalamet as the golden child of Hollywood with the talent that critics say defines his generation. Chalamet’s last three Christmas blockbusters are praised as revolutionary despite his movies failing to become one of the top three highest-grossing films in the box office of their year.
The discourse over Jordan’s work describes him as undeserving, reducing his performances to “cheap Netflix movies,” despite his work in the Creed trilogy and Marvel’s Black Panther which were both huge box office successes. This muted recognition shows how Black actors are overlooked when they have critically acclaimed performances, while White actors are praised regardless of success.
For a long time Hollywood has thrived off of inequality. White performers are often rewarded for taking risks and rewarded in critical acclaim while Black actors are often dismissed. Although the Academy Awards were established in 1927, a Black man was not nominated until 1958. As of 2026, only six Black men have won the Oscar for Best Actor.
The Critics’ Choice Awards are known to be a strong predictor of Oscar winners. Timothee Chalamet’s win at the Critics’ Choice awards isn’t a question of who is the best actor of the generation, but rather a question of if the Oscars will recognize a Black man’s talent–something they have historically failed to do.
Michael B. Jordan’s win has the potential to open doors for the Black community in the film industry and increase representation. When people see someone who looks like them taking a chance on their dreams and being rewarded, they are more likely to do the same. It affirms that success in closed spaces can be brought open by anyone and increases the legitimacy of the Oscars if all talent can win, regardless of color.
