Oscars 2013: Where have child actors gone post-nom?

In the aftermath of Oscars 2013, which featured the youngest-ever nominee for Best Actress, here's a look at what other under-18 nominees have gone on to do.

Todd Williamson/Invision/AP
Quvenzhane Wallis was nominated for Best Actress this year.

Quvenzhane Wallis's appearance at the Oscars made us wonder about other Oscar-nominated youngsters. What happens after the lights fade to black?

Contrary to popular belief, not all of the child actors’ stars in Hollywood fade after their meteoric rise into the limelight – sometimes they continue in films. Of course, the old aphorism “The light that burns twice as bright burns half as long” can remain true. (Actually, that’s from “Blade Runner.")

The kids that go to the Oscars are almost always nominated in the Best Supporting Actor or Best Supporting Actress categories. There have been more girls nominated for Oscars than boys, and no boy (defined as under eighteen) has ever won an Oscar. While we're not counting her in the child actress category because she's 22, Jennifer Lawrence is one of the youngest actors or actresses to ever win an Academy Award as a lead in a movie now that she won her Best Actress Oscar for "Silver Linings Playbook."

In the Best Supporting Actress category, three girls have actually won the award: Tatum O’Neal won for “Paper Moon” (1973) when she was ten, Anna Paquin won for “The Piano” (1993) when she was eleven, and Patty Duke won for “The Miracle Worker” (1962) when she was sixteen.

O’Neal’s career was somewhat short. However, Paquin currently stars in "True Blood," a show centering on vampires that airs on HBO, and you may also recognize her as Rogue from the "X-Men" films. Meanwhile, Patty Duke went on to a career as one of the most respected actresses in television, appearing on "The Patty Duke Show" and "Armstrong Circle Theatre," among others.

Two younger nominees you may remember from recent awards ceremonies, Saoirse Ronan of “Atonement” and Hailee Steinfeld of “True Grit,” have both continued working at a steady pace. Ronan, an Irish actress, has won multiple acting awards in Ireland post-"Atonement" and will be playing the lead role in the movie “The Host,” which is based on the Stephenie Meyer novel of the same name. Steinfeld was cast as Juliet in an upcoming adaptation of Shakespeare’s play directed by Carlo Carlei and will appear in the new “Ender’s Game” movie, which is due out in November.

A little further back, actress Jodie Foster, who was nominated at 14 for “Taxi Driver," has gone on to win two Academy awards for Best Actress and transitioned into directing.

As for the boys, Haley Joel Osmont of "The Sixth Sense" had a high-profile career as a child actor, appearing in “Pay it Forward” and “A.I.," which then morphed into him acting in movies such as "Montana Amazon" and doing voiceover work for the video game series “Kingdom Hearts.” Actor Justin Henry from “Kramer vs. Kramer” has continued working as an actor but may be still best known from his early role. In total, only six boys have ever been nominated for a performance, while more than twice as many girls have either won or gotten a nod.

It definitely appears that the star power gained from an Oscar nod gives young actors and actresses a short career boost – whether they are defined by the nomination or manage to emerge from its shadow is another matter entirely.

(To see some slightly silly child acting, check out this video by the website Jest, in which kids interpret this year's Best Picture nominees for other kids.)

You've read  of  free articles. Subscribe to continue.

Dear Reader,

About a year ago, I happened upon this statement about the Monitor in the Harvard Business Review – under the charming heading of “do things that don’t interest you”:

“Many things that end up” being meaningful, writes social scientist Joseph Grenny, “have come from conference workshops, articles, or online videos that began as a chore and ended with an insight. My work in Kenya, for example, was heavily influenced by a Christian Science Monitor article I had forced myself to read 10 years earlier. Sometimes, we call things ‘boring’ simply because they lie outside the box we are currently in.”

If you were to come up with a punchline to a joke about the Monitor, that would probably be it. We’re seen as being global, fair, insightful, and perhaps a bit too earnest. We’re the bran muffin of journalism.

But you know what? We change lives. And I’m going to argue that we change lives precisely because we force open that too-small box that most human beings think they live in.

The Monitor is a peculiar little publication that’s hard for the world to figure out. We’re run by a church, but we’re not only for church members and we’re not about converting people. We’re known as being fair even as the world becomes as polarized as at any time since the newspaper’s founding in 1908.

We have a mission beyond circulation, we want to bridge divides. We’re about kicking down the door of thought everywhere and saying, “You are bigger and more capable than you realize. And we can prove it.”

If you’re looking for bran muffin journalism, you can subscribe to the Monitor for $15. You’ll get the Monitor Weekly magazine, the Monitor Daily email, and unlimited access to CSMonitor.com.