Actually, many Oscar critics favored Stallone in the movie Creed for best Supporting Actor. Ruffalo also delivered a great performance for his work, in Spotlight, yet it was the mild-mannered Rylance, whose challenging role as a Soviet spy captured the award over his aggressive and outspoken competitors. It is Rylance's first Oscar nomination and first win. Rylance gave an outstanding performance, and he is worthy of the Oscar trophy.
While Mark Ruffalo's performance in "Spotlight" was excellent, Rylance's portrayal of a Soviet spy in "Bridge of Spies" was masterful. To be honest, there was no wrong choice between the two, as is often the case between Oscar nominees. Fellow nominees Sylvester Stallone and Tom Hardy were also incredible in their respective supporting roles, with Christian Bale on the outside looking in despite a very good performance in "The Big Short."
Mark Rylance and Mark Ruffalo were both nominated for Best Supporting Actor for their work in Bridge Of Spies and Spotlight, respectively, and, when Rylance’s name was called as the winner, there was a split second there when Mark Ruffalo . Oscar Jury wouldnt go wring. There should be some thing which would have been seen by the jury to have made Mark Rylance the winner.
Rylance had a difficult role in Bridge of Spies and he played it to perfection. His mannerisms and expressions really captured the essence of what it must have been like to be a Soviet spy. I don't see how any other actor could have done a better job. Without Rylance, the movie would not have been as good as it was.