Best Actress 1977: Anne Bancroft in The Turning Point

Anne Bancroft received her fourth Oscar nomination for playing Emma Jackline in The Turning Point. Emma is a famous ballerina, who has been dancing in the company for 38 years. Years ago, she and her friend Dedee (Shirley Maclaine) were competing for the same part. Since Dedee got pregnant, Emma landed the part and became a huge star, but her life feels empty, and now that she is getting older, her stardom is going down.


The role of Emma is really a supporting one, the leading nomination is just weird, but I guess she was such a great actress, they couldn't deny her the leading nomination. Anyway, that didn't bother me. I was already prepared for the fact that she has small screen time. That isn't a problem really in her performance. Anne Bancroft does a wonderful job here, making Emma the most interesting thing in the movie. I couldn't help but feel sorry for her, since she is starting to realize that she is too old for the very best parts in ballet. Anne shows us that she is a sad woman, knowing that she could have had a life with meaning, like her friend did, and not a life with just success. I felt all her scenes with Shirley were excellent, but a problem is that these two do not seem like old friends at all. I mean, they seem like each other, but best friends? The script really should have developed they're relationship more. I also thought it was so stupid how we never actually saw either of them dance. I know we saw a bit of Emma dancing, but this woman is supposed to have been dancing for nearly her whole life, she's supposed to be amazing. I might have seen more of that had she been given more dancing scenes. And although this probably should have been in Shirley's profile, but WHY did we never see Shirley dance? Throughout the whole film, we here that Dedee was a great dancer too, but we never see her dance. NEVER.

But these are more complaints about the film then about Anne's performance. The onlly real problem with her is that there should have been more character development. I just wanted more. But Anne Bancroft really gives a very good performance here, and for this , she gets

Best Actress 1977: Shirley Maclaine in The Turning Point

Shirley Maclaine received her fourth Oscar nomination for playing Dedee, in The Turning Point. Dedee was once an extremely talented dancer in a refined dancing company, both she and her best friend Emma (Anne Bancroft). When both Emma and Dedee were auditioning for a major ballet role, Dedee got pregnant and she decided to have the baby and raise a family, while Emma got the part and became a huge star. 38 years later, they meet again. Dedee's daughter jooins the same dance company they both were in, and starts to climb her way to the top, prompting Dedee to think about her daughter's future, and the fact that she never became a star.



When The Turning Point begins, it is a an entertaining, interesting story. It really brings up our choices when we are young and how they affect us when we're older. The dancing is beautiful to watch, and I personally was excited to see how both Emma and Dedee's relationship would develop. Shirley Maclaine is wonderful here, showing us that she regrets how her life ended up and that she is afraid that her daughter will end up hurt or disappointed. Shirley has a captivating presence in these scenes, that are just beautiful. But when her daughter moves to New York, the air seems to come out of the movie and this damages both the film and everyone's performance. The movie is trying to focus on Leslie Brown exclusively, and sort of drops Shirley's character development. There are never really any good scenes afterwards, and when she has an affair, it seems so random and unbelievable. She picks up more steam in the end, I like her scene at the ballet with her old director, asking him whether if she had not gotten pregnant, had she had been picked for the role instead of Emma. Her arguement in the restaurant is also pretty good, but her fight outside is too screechy, and ridiculous, I personally felt that Anne Bancroft outshined her here, though I should rewatch the scene just to be sure. But she does have a lovely moment at the end, when she looks at her daughter, surrounded by admirers, getting the fame that she herself did not get, but Shirley shows us that Dedee is radiant with happiness about her daughter's success. But this is ruined due to the incredibly dumb ending scene with her and Anne Bancroft, which is glib and unbelievable.


Shirley Maclaine tries her best to get a strong performance out of this movie, and she does in some ways, but the awfulness of the screenplay drag her down until the badness of her performance overshadows what's good about it. She gets

The 80th Oscars, a look back: Part 2

Best Supporting Actor: Javier Bardem was the biggest lock that year, and everyone knew he'd win. The only possible spoiler was Hal Hoolbrook, due to sentiment, but I honestly feel that the Academy didn't like Into The Wild enough to give it an award. The other nominees never got enough buzz at all. I myself was dissapointed by Bardem's win, just because I hate sure-things, and because his performance didn't seem that great to me. It wasn't when I saw it two years later. Tom Wilikinson is my pick, but I should see/rewatch all of these nominees.









Best Supporting Actress: The years most unpredictable race, beating Best Actress. Everyone had a chance, except for Saorise Ronan.

At first, it was Ryan vs. Blanchett. Ryan had won all the critics awards, and received raves, but Cate had won her share of critics awards too, and the fact that she had convincingly pulled of playing Bob Dylan received great word of mouth. Cate had also won the globe too, which helped her chances. But on SAG night, when the Best Supporting Actress envelope was opened, neither of their names were in it. Ruby Dee won, for her short, yet memorable performance in American Gangster. People started to realize that she had quite a lot of sentiment,going for her, and the Academy easily could reward a veteran.


But what counted against all three of these women was that they're films weren't well received at all by the Academy. One's who was was Tilda Swinton. She had been a sure-bet for a nominee, yet no one ever really touted her as a winner. But she pulled a huge surprise by winning the BAFTA, and this led some pundits to predict her, spotting that Michael Clayton really didn't have much chance of a win anywhere else. This and the fact she gave a great performance tipped the odds in her favor, though in the actual voting, I bet it was a close race between her, Ryan, and Blanchett. I was rooting for Ronan at the time, and was totally shocked when Alan Arkin read Tilda's name I was predicting a win for Amy Ryan. When I saw Gone Baby Gone after the Oscars, I personally felt that Ryan's performance was more impressive, but Tilda is an extremely deserving winner. \


I loved her speech by the way!











Best Original Screenplay: Juno won, and it was a pretty sure thing. Everyone raved about the screenplay, plus it was the only way to honor Juno. It's only competition came from Michael Clayton, a terrific script, that in retrospect, probably should have won, though The Savages was great too. I was rooting for Juno at the time, and though I don't like it as much as I used to, I still think it's a worthy winner here. I felt the script did a great job of developing all the characters in the film and it was a pretty entertaining story . And some of that dialogue is really memorable.






Best Adapted Screenplay: No Country won here as well, this was an easy category to predict. Usually, though not always, the Best Picture winner picks up a Screenplay award. Diving Bell And The Butterfly and There Will be Blood were strong contenders too, but I suppose the academy really loved No Country.

My preference is Away From Her, a beautiful screenplay, and a great movie.










Overall, this was a good year for movies, not my favorite, but a good year none the less. But nearly all the winners didn't deserve it, at least to me. I personallly feel that 2006 and 2008 were better years for film, and I think I'll cover the 2008-2009 oscars next.

What werre your feelings/predictions then? What do you think now?

The 80th Oscars, a look back: Part 1

Since Oscar season is coming up, I felt that we should take a look back at the Oscars three years ago, a much different Oscar year then this or last year. Let's try to remember how we felt about the nominees and who we wanted to win and what we think of them now. I'm only going to do the first 4 out of the major 8 categories and the next 4 tomorrow.




Best Picture: No Country For Old Men won this year, sadly. It was a pretty sure thing, having won all the main precursor awards, and given that the Coen's were overdue. There Will Be Blood was buzzed about, and many now call it a masterpiece. I personally liked it, but felt it was flawed. It was too dark and offbeat for the academy, I think. Juno had a chance, given that it was the highest grossing film of the five, and was an upbeat comedy, but comedies rarely win, they probably figured the screenplay win was enough. Michael Clayton never got enough momentum to ever pull off a win, and Atonement's buzz really faded before the nominations came out, so it had no chance either.





I personally was rooting for Juno with all of my heart at the time, and was disappointed, but not surprised when it lost. I had seen it five times, and loved it when it came out. Now, I've rewatched it and found it okay, but not really oscar-worthy. I loved Michael Clayton, loved the 1str half of Atonement, was disappointed by the 2nd half. About a year or two ago, I saw No Country, I didn't really like it. It was just alright. Not that strong of a year, but perhaps I'll rewatch in the future.


Best Director: The Coen brothers won, though they're win wasn't as locked up, given Julian Schnabel was a strong compepitor as well. I need to rewatch here, plus I haven't seen Diving Bell, but I don't really want too.




Best Actor: Daniel Day-Lewis was a sure thing. George Clooney was once a major compepitor, but Day-Lewis was just on a roll. I was rooting for Depp at the time,, but now I just don't know. I still haven't seen Tommy Lee or Viggo Mortensen.







Best Actress: Here was the most exciting category for me. I was rooting for Ellen Page, I totally wanted her to win. I was so heartbroken when she didn't. My hopes were too high, I suppose.


I was right though in predicting that Julie Christie would lose. I thought the film was too little seen, and I think that might have been a factor. When I first saw it, I didn't think she was that great, but I just didn't how to judge subtle acting then, and was angry about her beating Ellen Page at all the precursors that year. I really underestimated Marion, I just thought a foreign language performance wouldn't win. When I saw her, I didn't like her, but my sister said I was being unfair, so I sort of talked myself into liking her. As for Blanchett, I actually thought she was great, but the film was terrible. I saw Linney afterwards, and I really liked her! And she's grown on me since! But as you can probably see, I really need to rewatch all of the nominees before I can defintely say who should have won.












Part 2 will come soon! But what were your thoughts this year, and what are your thoughts on this year looking back on it now?

Merry Christmas!

Merry Christmas everyone! Hope you have a happy Holliday!

True Grit and Winter's Bone reviews

True Grit: I didn't really expect much from this movie and I actually thought it was alright. Well made, and entertaining, but nothing Oscar-worthy, and it had a ridiculous story towards the end. Jeff Bridges was okay, but all he really did was mumble and act tough. He had some pretty good moments, but as I say, this isn't oscar-worthy. Matt Damon was actually funny and entertaining, a nomination for him would be deserved. It's pretty ridiculous though, that Hailee Steinfeld is being campaigned in Supporting, she's in every scene, basically! But her performance wasn't that great, it feels annoying, and she only excels in the last 20 minutes or so. So, an entertaining film that is worth a see, just nothing amazing.







Winter's Bone: This is a movie I was really looking forward to. It's about a girl (Jeniffer Lawrence) who's father goes missing, and she has to find him, either dead (Preferably) or alive. This movie and Frozen River have a lot a lot in common. They are both about people living at the edges of society and have to use they're bravery to make things better. They're also pretty realistic in how they're made. But I personally prefered Frozen River because the heroine is more likable and I got a lot more out of the story then this one. As I've said, it's pretty real and well made/written, but I really didn't get anything out of the story. Jeniffer Lawrence was okay, in fact, very good in a lot of scenes, but she's also pretty bad in others, with her sassy attitude, plus her rather wearing accent. I plan on re-watching some of her key scenes though, ones I thought were good, but I could see the acting in them. I think John Hawkes was really good though. He should be nominated. A good effort, but it just never really affected me.



Have you seen either of these? If you have, tell me your thoughts!

And unfortunately, I can't do a B.A 1977 profile in a while, because I want to save Diane for later, and the library's closed for the hollidays, so I can't check out Julia or The Turning Point yet.

Oscar predictions part 2

Now that the critics awards are rolling in, the odds have changed, though we still have no clear frontrunners yet in certain races.



Best Picture: The Scocial Network really has been sweeping these awards, and it will no doubt be a top contender. I haven't seen The King's Speech yet, but I doubt it will win, unless it's AMAZING. Usually, period pieces don't win, unless they're on the level of The English Patient, and this movie doesn't look like it is. But I'll decide when I see it. The Fighter is looking more and more to me like a strong possibility as an upset, but we'll have to wait till the Globes plus the B.F.CA to see.


Best Director: David Fincher , along with The Social Network, have been taking home all the awards, and I have a feeling that he could win, but his film does not get Best Picture. But it's still to early to say.



Best Actor: I just checked a precursor chart from an Oscar site that I follow and Collin Firth is in the lead, though James Franco is close behind, and Jesse Einberg in The Social Network as well. I still think Collin will win, but Franco is a serious threat. His performance got great word of mouth, plus he's an actor who's been very active these past couple years. Einberg is probably too young, though I still haven't seen the movie.


Best Actress: Natalie Portman's chances are increasing, but I'm afraid that Benning is still a threat, given her overdue status, and also if Sandra Bullock could build momentum out of nowwhere last year, anyone could. Lawrence will be nominated, probably, but I doubt she can win, though I still haven't seen her, UGH! I have it in my living room, but still haven't watched it. Nicole Kidman is a solid bet, but her chances of winning are very slim, though the role is quite interesting. I just read the play last week, and it was really good, though a bit bare. I wonder how they'll adapt to film. As for the last slot, I'm still unsure about. Neither Swank or Berry are going to make it, I think they're SAG/GLOBE nominations were just star-power. I'm going to say MIchelle Williams will get it for Blue Valentine . She's a hardworking actress, and the film looks wonderful.

Best Supporting Actor: Christian Bale will get nominated for The Fighter and he'll probably win too. Geoffrey Rush (The KIng's Speech) and Andrew Garfiel (The Social Network) will also get nominated, I think.

Best Supporting Actress: HBC, and the two Fighter ladies are in, but the other two slots are mysteries. I'll say Mila Kunis, (Black Swan) and Hailee Steinfelt will get in.


What are your thoughts? Have you seen any Oscar movies lately?

Best Actress 1977: Marsha Mason in The Goodbye Girl

Marsha Mason received her 2nd oscar nomination forf playing Paula in The Goodbye Girl. Paula lives with her 10-year old daughter ( Quinn Cummings), and has just been walked out on by her boyfriend. She is so depressed, and frustrated with her life, and before she knows it, an actor by the name of Elliot Garfield (Richard Dreyfuss)knocks on the door, telling her that her ex-boyfriend rented the apartment to him. Given that she has no choice in the matter and that he has the decency not to call a lawyer, they both compromise, deciding to share the apartment. It's unbearable at first, but sooner or later, they begin to fall in love.




In the beginning, Marsha Mason does a fantastic job: She's believable, funny, and loveable. She could have made this character stale and boring like all the other roles like this, but instead she chooses to play Paula in a tougher, stronger way that makes the performance so strong. Both she and Richard Dreyfuss have brilliant chemistry, they never make one wrong move in making they're relationship believable. But there are problems in her performance, that is both her fault and the films. Marsha Mason is engaging, funny, and completely enjoyable in the first half while Richard Dreyfuss is alright, but annoying and over the top. But as they start falling for each other, it reverses. Marsha Mason is still wonderful, but during some moments, I really felt I could see the acting. It's not that it's bad acting, it's not obvious in a bad way. it's still delivered perfectly, but it felt obvious, on the other hand, Dreyfuss is able to be funny, but also really natural. Also, the movie starts to become predictable, and I really wanted there to be more development, things got too rushed. Especially the ending. It seemed so unbelievable to me. And I think that Quinn Cummings should have been given more material to work with, but that's the script's fault and it doesn't really affect Marsha's performance.

But Marsha Mason still delivers an excellent, entertaining performance that along with Dreyfuss, makes the movie worth seeing. She gets

Black Swan review

After seeing both Requiem For A Dream and The Wrestler, I never thought I'd see something more gruesome or harrowing. Well, The Wrestler isn't that harrowing, but it sure is gruesome. Anyway after seeing Black Swan today, I have.


It is about a ballerina named Nina (Natalie Portman), who is a complete shut-in: She shows no real emotion, and is shut in inside herself. It's really her mother's fault (Barbara Hershey, who is quite good) who not only pushed her, but kept her feeling like a child, never a woman, or her own person) . But eventually, she gets the dual role in Swan Lake and she is extremely happy, but since she show's no emotion, her dancing is all techinque, but no feeling, it's extremely hard for her to dance the Black Swan, something the director constantly points out. Soon, a new dancer arrives, who is exactly the opposite- She's outgoing, funny, and dances with feeling, she is able to let go. Nina is constantly afraid that lily will take the role away from her, and the role itself soons becomes so much stress, she is barely keeping it afloat, and soon a whole series of things start to happen that make the film so unpredictable. This is a fantastic piece of work-superbly directed, it was so surreal, and visionary, it was indeed a fascinating experience. But it is truly disturbing- it's even more then requiem for A dream, and I had to close my eyes more then once. But Natalie Portman really outdid herself here. She perfectly sets up and balances the character, making us really feel her paranoi and her feelings of being preassured. Portman makes us see that she wants to be a star, but doesn't really think she fits the bill. That's why she wants to be ''perfect". Quite a lot of her performance is very subtle and Natalie truly disappears into the part, making it her own. Who else could have played it? No one.


But I have a slight complaint. I felt that that she could have maybe have given a little more strength in some scenes and I felt that could have the change in her character slower, but that's really the script's fault. Which brings me to something else: I felt the movie was a bit too abrupt, and the script could have been more carefully thought out, especially with the director's character. But it was still a great movie anyway, and Natalie Portman is definetly worth seeing...

Best Actress 1977

The next year I'll be doing a ranking/profile on is 1977 and the nominees were:

Anne Bancroft in The Turning Point


Jane Fonda in Julia


Diane Keaton in Annie Hall


Shirley Maclaine in The Turning Point


Marsha Mason in The Goodbye Girl
























So, who do you predict? Who are you rooting for?


What Oscar stuff is on your mind now?

What to do now?

Hey! I'm REALLY, REALLY sorry about all these delays. It has been over two months since I've made a real post, and I stopped blogging for so long because my schedule has been so busy and I was burned out of of doing profiles. But I'm determined to start up again and although I said I would do 1958, my interest in the year has gone down a little and I've decided to save it. I'm not sure what I'll decide to do, but I'll decide by today. I'm olpen to any requests and anything you want to talk about it with me.

Random Post

Hey! I'm just going to say that I'm really sorry about the continuing delays. I have a lot of work to do, and until I get on top of that, I'm not sure when my next post will be. I might post Shirley's profile on here today, but I'm not sure. I'm really sorry about this....




Anyway, november is almost over, and Oscar season is heating up. But rather slowly. Nothing is really gaining steam, excdept for The Social Network, which I think is the frontrunner at this point. So far, nothing has really come out near where I live, though Love And Other Drugs is coming out next week, so yay! I'm a fan of Anne Hathaway, so I hope she does a good job. I guess I'll go ahead and make predictions:



Best Picture: The Social Network and The Kings Speech seem to be the ones with the most buzz, though I heard that Pixar is going for Toy Story 3 for the win. I'm just going to predict T.S.N right now.

Best Director: David Fincher seems to be the likely choice, even if it doesn't win. He's overdue, plus it looks like a big visionary acheivement.

Best Actor: The King's Speech cvould easily lose it's Best Picture momentum, but I'm sure that Collin Firth will be nominated, and right now, he's a shoo-in to win. But I've heard that James Franco could be nominated, and I think he could ewnd up a dark-horse.

Best Actress: Annete Benning seems to have a lock on this award, for her performance in The Kids Are All Right. But I don't think that she's a sure winner. Natalie Portman could also win, for her performance in Black Swan. Portman has been an impressive actress since the 90's, and her performance could be the hearet-wrenching, revolutiuonary performance that the academy can throw a win too, though it;'s usually a surprise. I'm also predicting a nomination for Lesley Manville for Another Year, who could be this year's Melissa Leo, unless she's put in Supporting, but I just read Sony Classic's is campaigning for her in lead.

Best Supporting Actor: I read tat Geoffrey Rush is supposed to be the frontrunner, but I don't think he'll win. Gone are the days when one film wins two acting awards. He could though if the competition is weak. Oh, and can someone tell me about the guys in The Social Network and if they are leading or supporting?

Best Supporting Actress: The most exciting race this year, since, unlike last year's Monique, it is wide-open. Helena-Bonham-Carter will probably be nominated, but it could be a really small role. I'll predict double nominations for Amy Adams and Melissa Leo, both being campaigned for The Fighter.

So, what do you think? Who will win? And again, I'm really sorry about the delays.....

Back!

Hey everyone! I know it's been a LONG time since I did a real post on here, but since Oscar season is starting up and now I'm getting back into to doing profiles, I've decided to go back doing posts.....



So, here's a few options for what year I should do and next and I want you to pick which one you want me to do:

1. Continue with Best Actor 2004

2. Best Actress 1958

3. Best Actress 1961

4. Best Actress 2007

5. Best Actress 1956

Happy Birthday to me!

Today is my birthday! Yay!!!!!!!!!

Greetings

Hello everyone! I just wanted to let you know that it will be a very long time until I make a post again because I really don't have time, plus I want to take a break from blogging. So it will be around early November when I make my next real post. I'll do Best Actor 2004 then, then revert to Best Actress again. Have any requests for years you want me to do? Plus, do you have any interesting questions/comments? This an open post, so talk to me about anything you want.


P.S: This is just a random picture I did to make the post more interesting.

Hey!

I'm SORRY it's been so longggg since I last posted. It's just School started and I have a lot more work to do and I really don't have time to until the weekend, since I'm helping out with a play which takes most of my time.



Anyway, how have you been? Anything you want to know? Comment openly!

Best Actress post part 2

1950: Here's a year that's considered one of the greatest ever, sometimes even the greatest, and it's certainly the most iconic. Both Fritz and Sage have done this year and both had both different and similiar thoughts. Sage's ranking: 1. Swanson 2. Parker 3. Davis 4. Baxter 5. Holliday. Fritz's ranking: 1. Holliday 2. Swanson 3. Davis 4. Parker 5. Baxter. Judy's win/performance is very controversial given she beat out BOTH Davis and Swanson! Those two are both loved beyond loved by oscar lovers and many say that they're among the greatest performances of all time. As for Baxter, I personally love her, but some think she's the only mishap in All About Eve. And poor Eleanor Parker gets hardly any discussion at all, but at least she made second on Sage's ranking!


Oscar winner: Judy Holliday

Overall winner: Gloria Swanson (It's difficult to decide between her and Davis, but I gave Gloria the edge here. Tell me if you disagree!)



1951: Sage has done this year as well and her ranking is; 1. Vivien 2. Winters 3. Kate 4. Parker 5. Jane. Vivien is, of course, the overall winner here, though both Kate and Shelley get a lot of love, while Parker is talked about only occasionally, and Jane not at all.

Oscar winner: Vivien Leigh

Overall winner: Vivien Leigh

1952: A year that's never much discussed, except for Shirley Booth, who most love, and Julie Haris, who surprisingly always crops up on best lists.

Oscar winner: Shirley Booth

Overall winner: Shirley Booth

1953: NOW, here's a year that really isn't talked about. Pretty much forgotten. Some love Audrey, some hate her, I personally am in the middle: Not bad, just not oscar-worthy. Deborah Kerr is discussed ocassionally, but not too much.

Oscar winner: Audrey Hepburn

Overall winner: Audrey Hepburn

1954: One of the biggest Best Actress upsets ever was when Grace Kelly in The Country Girl beat Judy Garland in A Star Is Born. It was strictly a two-horse race between them that year: On one side was Kelly, an actress who was the new thing in Hollywood, was starring in three succesful films that same year, and was in a film that got all the big nominations at from the Academy . On the other side was Judy, once MGM'S greatest star , who was dumped by them, made a comeback by returning through concerts, and was now making a film comeback with the performance of a lifetime. The sentiment factor was very powerful in her case, and most considered her a sure thing. But she didn't win....... Why? Well, here's what happened: All the pundits underestimated Grace, not realizing that her new popularity/her film's success was an important factor. But the biggest reason why is the fact that Warner Brothers undermined A Star Is Born, not campaigning for it at all, and most importantly, cutting many of it's scenes, which diluted the impact of her performance, and confused the voters (Which should they vote for, the full performance or the cut one?). Grace's win was such a tragedy, not only because Garland gave her best performance, but because it added yet ANOTHER hardship in her life which was already so traumatic . Nowadays, Judy is the clear winner.

Oscar winner: Grace Kelly

Overall winner: Judy Garland


1955: Another barely talked about year. Only Magnani is discussed, and everyone is amazed by her, so.....

Oscar winner: Anna Magnani

Overall winner: Anna Magnani

1956: A year that is considered very weak. Kate seems to have done much better, nobody talks about Kelly, Ingrid is hated by most, and Kerr isn't really talked about (Though she did win Fritz's vote. His ranking: 1. Kerr 2. Baker 3. Bergman 4. Kelly 5. Hepburn). The overall winner here is Carol Baker for Baby Doll,who I'm looking forward to seeing.

Oscar winner: Ingrid Bergman

Overall winner: Carol Baker

1957: And here we have another year that's not talked about. I'm getting sick of saying that. I'll just say...

Oscar winner: Joanne Woodward

Overall winner: Joanne Woodward

1958: Maclaine and Kerr aren't discussed, some love Russel, but the two who are most discussed are Elizabeth Taylor for C.O.A.H.T.R and Susan Hayward for I Want To Live. I haven't seen Taylor, but I was blown away by Hayward, and I'm not the only one. But some really dislike her, calling her ''obvious'' and 'over the top''.

Oscar winner: Susan Hayward

Overall winner: Susan Hayward

1959: Both Dinasztie and Fritz have done these years and they're rankings would be: Dinasztie: 1. A. Hepburn 2. K. Hepburn 3. Signoret 4. Day 5. Taylor. Fritz: 1. K. Hepburn 2. A. Hepburn 3. Signoret 4. Taylor 5. Day. Now, I'd say Simone is still the winner, though both Hepburns and Liz have they're supporters.

Oscar winner: Simone Signoret

Overall winner: Simone Signoret

1960: Elizabeth Taylor won this year, and she's one of the most hated winners ever. To me, she is pretty bad, failing completely in the first half and for most of the middle. This is not her fault, but the films, since the script is so terrible. But she does rise above at least for about a quarter of it, through out the end of the middle, to towards the ending. But she did not deserve the Oscar. I guess the overall winner is Shirley Maclaine since the other's aren't discussed.

Oscar winner: Elizabeth Taylor

Overall winner: Shirley Maclaine

1961: Sophia Loren won here, and she definietly was worthy: A great and very impressive performance. But she beat two widely loved performances: Audrey Hepburn in Breakfast At Tiffany's and Natalie Wood in A Splendor In The Grass. Both are greatly admired, but in the end, i'd say Audrey is the overall winner.

Oscar winner: Sophia Loren

Overall winner: Audrey Hepburn


1962: Like 1950, this year is regarded as one of the greatest lineups ever: Lee Remick and Geraldine page are highly regarded, but most people seem to rally around either Anne Bancroft, Bette Davis, or Katharine Hepburn. These three are all worshipped, but Anne Bancroft usually comes out the winner.

Oscar winner: Anne Bancroft

Overall winner: Anne Bancroft

1963: Like 53, this has to be one of the most forgotten years ever. Dinasztie did this year and his ranking was: 1. Neal 2. Caron 3. Roberts 4. Wood 5. Maclaine. Patricia Neal is, indeed, one of the best winners and most agree, though the Leading/Supporting argument still continues. None of the other nominees are discussed at all.

Oscar winner: Patricia Neal

Overall winner: Patricia Neal


Agree/disagree?

Best Actress Post: part 1

I just had an idea for a new post. In this post, I will be discussing every Best Actress year and telling what seems to be the overall opinion and winner around the internet. I'll be starting with 1936, since the years before that aren't really talked about at all. correct me if I'm wrong and I probably will be for some of these. So here we go:




Best Actress 1936: Sage has already done this year, and if you remember, Irenne Dunne was her pick, followed by Gladys George, then Louis Rainer, then Norma Sheer, then Carol Lombard. Dunne, George, and Sheer aren't discussed very much, but Rainer gets a lot of hate from nearly everyone, mostly because most say that she supporting and Lombard always gets raves. So........


Oscar winner: Louise Rainer

Overall winner: Carol Lombard


Best Actress 1937: Louise Rainer won again, playing a very diffferent character, in The Good Earth. It was an upset then, since Greta Garbo was expected to win, and like her first win, a lot of people hate it, myself included (To a degree). Now, most seem to feel that Garbo indeed should have won, though Irene Dunne has her fair share of supporters, and Stanywck and Gaynor aren't discussed at all.

Oscar winner: Louise Rainer

Overall winner: Greta Garbo

Best Actress 1938: I know absouletely nothing about this year, so I'll just say that Bette is the overall winner, and she probably is.

Oscar winner: Bette Davis

Overall winner: Bette Davis

Best Actress 1939: Uhhhhhh, Vivien Leigh of course! How could she not be???? Her win was a sure thing, though I heard one pundit predicted Davis. Anyway, Bette seems to get a lot of praise, but I'm not sure about the other three nominees. Please fill me in!

Oscar winner: Viven Leigh

Overall winner: Vivien leigh

Best Actress 1940: Ginger Rogers was able to win the Oscar, causing a surprise (At least according to one of my oscar books). her win isn't very well regarded these days. Fontaine has, I think, the biggest fan base, though Hepburn and Davis have theirs as well. Nobody likes Scott, it seems.

Oscar winner; Ginger Rogers

Overall winner: Joan Fontaine

Best Actress 1941: Joan Fontaine WAS able to win this year though, and ironically, she's one of the most universally hated winners. I really want to see how bad she is for myself, but sadly, Greer Garson's movie is so hard to find. As for the other nominees, I have seen Davis, thought she was great, as most people seem to as well. I never hear too much about Dehavilland (At least for her actual performance) Stanywck, though some think she should have been nominated for The Lady Eve.

Oscar winner: Joan Fontaine

Overall winner: Bette Davis (I guess)


Best Actress 1942: Fritz has done this year, and his ranking was: 1. Davis 2. Garson 3. Hepburn 4. Wright 5. Russel. According to him, this year was incredibly weak and nobody seems to argue that. In fact, this year is hardly ever discussed at all, though Davis does get some love.

Oscar winner: Greer Garson

Overall winner: Bette Davis (Wow, she's really raking the wins!)


Best Actress 1943: An even less discussed year. The two frontrunners were Ingrid Bergman and Jennifer Jones, and Jones won. The other nominees are never talked about.

Oscar winner: Jennifer Jones

Overall winner: Jennifer Jones

Best Actress 1944: Ingrid did win this year though and deservedly so, for her superb performance in Gaslight. The opinion on her is mixed: Some love her, others find her shaky. Plus, Barbara Stanywck was nominated for Double Indeminity and most seems to think she was robbed.

Oscar winnner: Ingrid Bergman

Overall winner: Barbara Stanywck

Best Actress 1945: Sage has done this year and it's one of my favorite years that she's done. Surprisingly, she did not go with Joan Crawford,but Gene Tierney for Leave Her To Heaven. Her ranking was: 1. Gene 2. Joan 3. Garson 4. Jones 5. Bergman. The only nominee who is discussed by Joan is Ingrid, who gets a lot of praise, but I guess not by everyone.

Oscar winner: Joan Crawford

Overall winner: Joan Crawford

Best Actress 1946: Another year that's not discussed at all, and I'm starting to think/know that the 40's years get hardly any attention. Olivia Dehavilland won for To Each His Own, and she's not really talked about all. But some internet users back Celia Johnson in The Brief Encounter, so I'll just go with her.

Oscar winner: Olivia Dehavilland

Overall winner: Celia Johnson

Best Actress 1947: Finally a year that's discussed! As we all know, Rosalind Russel was the sure thing frontrunner, but Loretta young shocklingly pulled a HUGE upset. Perhaps the biggest one in the history of Best Actress. Fritz also did this year and his ranking would be: 1. Hayward 2. Russel 3. Joan 4. Young 5. McGuire. Most feel that Hayward and Russel were the only worthy nominees and the others weren't good at all, especially Young and Mcguire.

Oscar winner: Loretta Young

Overall winner: Rosalind Russel

Best Actress 1948: Dinaztie did this year, and his ranking was 1: Wyman 2. Stanywck 3. ingrid 4. irenne 5. Olivia. It was a race between olivia and Jane I think, but Wyman won. Today, most back either of those two, and everyone hates ingrid!

Oscar winner: Jane Wyman

Overall winner: Jane Wyman

Best Actress 1949: Sage has done this year as well and her ranking is: 1. olivia 2. Hayward 3. Young 4. Kerr 5. Crain. None of the nominees are discussed, besides olivia who won and deservedly so.

oscar winner: Olivia Dehavilland

Overall winner: Olivia Dehavilland


And we'll just stop here since I'm getting tired and I've covered enough years for now. So, what are your thoughts? Agree/disagree?

Hey Everyone!

Hey! So, I have a few announcments to make. The first and most important is I've decided to quit doing Best Supporting Actress 68. Why? Because I'm just having trouble being able to watch all the films in a fast way and the odds are that it'll take me too long again. And that all the films are checked out from the library or the library is closed, so....... So I've decided to do a Best Actor year, though I'm not sure what. If you have any requests tell me! And after that, I'll either do a Supporting year or continue with Leading (Again, any requests tell me). And I'll also be continuing with the Glee Meme, which hardly anyone comments on. Okay, I understand that when you comment on something that you haven't seen/don't know about , your comments are a bit boring but do it anyway! It feels great to get comments, they're the whole point of doing a post (At least for me), and when you comment on other people's blogs/follow, you get more comments that way! Plus, you don't even have to comment on the performance/film ect that the post is on, ask anything! I don't care if it's WAYYYYYYYY Off-topic, just do it! You can do just that in the comments below! So, comment away!

Best Actress 1968: The Resolution!

5. Vanessa Redgrave in Isadora: Isadora is a terrible film, but Redgrave plays Isadora Duncan superbly and always realistically. It's a performance I more respect then like, but she certainly is impressive.








4. Barbara Streisand in Funny Girl: Barbara Streisand's acting is sometimes lacking, but she comes out triumphant in the end, with a marvelous voice and amazing timing and presense.














3. Joanne Woodward in Rachel, Rachel: Joanne Woodward gives a subtle, fascinating performance that grows and grows. She is able to keep her film from going into a mess and she's perfectly cast.








2. Patricia Neal in The Subject Was Roses: Patricia Neal gives a deep, devastating portrayal of a cold, and isolated/isolating woman. A haunting performance that everyone should get a chance to see (If you ever find it online, let me know!) .







1. Katharine Hepburn in The Lion In Winter: Katharine Hepburn is incredibly good and powerful as Eleanor, brining out all of the emotion in her.















What a great year! All of the nominees would have been worthy winners, though I wouldn't have been really happy if Redgrave won, since the other four gave stronger performances, but anyway, still a great year. The hardest part for me was deciding between Woodward and Streisand for the 3/4 spots, but in the end, I picked Woodward since I felt her performance had a stronger impact. It took me nearly a month to finish this year and I'm really sorry about that, but hopefully that won't happen again. But do you have any requests for the next year? I have a Supporting year in mind, but I'll take Leading and other Supporting suggestions as well.




My ranking of the nominated films:


1. The Lion In Winter


2. The Subject Was Roses

3. Funny Girl

4. Rachel, Rachel

5. Isadora

Best Actress 1968: Katharine Hepburn in The Lion In Winter

Katharine Hepburn received her 11th Oscar nomination and won (In a tie with Barbara Streisand) for playing Eleanor of Aqquantine, in The Lion In Winter.



The Lion in Winter is an overall excellent film, though it does get a bit ridiculous in a few scenes. But the acting is superb and Katharine Hepburn is fantastic in it. She shows Eleanor as a cruel and manipulative woman, but who has beaten down by long suffering. Her line delivery is simply fabulous: The script gives her the best, most delicious lines, and Hepburn nails all of them. She also shows all aspects of Eleanor: cruelty, deceitfullness, kindness (Yes, kindness), vulnerability, ect. She is great through out the whole film, but she is especially great during her famous scene in her tower room and the huge argument between her and O'Toole towards the end of the film. She and O'Toole work amazing together, both of them capture/disappear into they're characters so well, and you can really connect with they're relationship.



Katharine Hepburn gives a powerful, beautiful performance, which obviously gets

Best Actress 1968: Joanne Woodward in Rachel, Rachel

Joanne Woodward received her 2nd Oscar nomination for playing Rachel Cameron in Rachel, Rachel. Rachel is a very sheltered person who still lives with her mother and is unable to connect to hardly anyone, especially herself. But when she starts to become closer to her friend (Estelle Parsons) and begins a romance with an old friend, her life begins to change, but not in the cliched way that these types of films usually to go.


Rachel, Rachel is a film that I originally found to be terrible and it's true, a lot of it is a misfire (Like the whole church scene, like what's that about?). In the beginning, I felt that Joanne Woodward was really bland and awkward, but I suppose that this is the point, since Rachel IS bland and awkward. But in retrospect, Woodward does a good job at showing how her character is so afraid of change, but she wants to be able to be more open in her life. Woodward does this all with her facial expressions and she is perfect.

The best thing about her performance is that she superbly handles Rachel's character development- She makes her build and build, and shows many facets of her character along the way, until we see who she really is inside. Her scenes with Estelle Parsons are excellent, very convincing as best friends, even better are the scenes with her mother, which are very sad.


Rachel Cameron is not an easy role to play, but Woodward was able to make her a fascinating character and delivered an outstanding performance.



P.S: I couldn't find a good enough picture for Woodward in Rachel, Rachel, so I just did one of her instead.

Best Actress 1968: Barbara Streisand in Funny Girl

Barbara Streisand received her first Oscar nomination (and won in a tie with K.H) for playing famous stage star Fanny Brice in Funny Girl.



Funny Girl is, as Malcolm said in his review of it, completely a star vechile for Barbara Streisand. Fanny is a difficult role, one that requires star presense and a marvelous voice and Barbara has both. She absouletly nails the comic requirements of the role,, though it gets annoying, but that is sometimes the point. She also is able to make us believe the romance between Fanny and Nick, despite the fact that Omar Shariff is miscast. Barbara does a terrific job of adding vulnerability and lack of confidence in Fanny, and every emotion she shows in her is genuine. She has great timing, both comic and dramatic and of course, her singing is great. "I'm The Greatest Star" is filled with a thrilling rush of emotion, and is brought to even greater heights in Don't Rain On My Parade, while she gives both "People' and "Funny Girl" just the right amount of desperation and longing.


But her performance isn't 100 % perfect though. After "Don't Rain On My Parade", Barbara's acting starts becoming a little amateur . She seems a bit off in the second half and as I said, amateurish. Also, the movie gets a lot worse in the second part as it goes down, it drags her along with it, in a way. You also get the feeling that Barbara sometimes relies too much on her star presense instead of actually acting. But Barbara still does a very good job in the 2nd part and she does get better towards the end, rising above the mediocre script, especially in the scene when she confronts Nick after two years being apart. And of course, her "My Man" is a brilliant scene, acted and sung perfectly by her. It's a hard performance to rate, but in the end Barbara does an outstanding job and is able to rise above her material and come out triumphant.

Patrcia Neal

Rest in Peace, Patricia Neal, You are a great actress. You were fantastic in Hud and brilliant in The Subject Was Roses as well. Again, rest in peace.

Best Actress 1968: Patricia Neal in The Subject Was Roses

Patricia Neal received her second Oscar nomination for playing Pat, a woman who's son has come home for war in The Subject Was Roses.


The Subject Was Roses is a great film, really underrated, well that's because it's so fucking hard to find! Honestly, I haven't been able to find it anywhere! And I've looked my hardest (mostly) at all the places I've been to! Anyway, Patricia Neal brings some of the earthiness to Pat that she brought to Alma in Hud, but Neal's performance her is even better then that. Pat is a very repressed and distant person, (though maybe some of her distance comes from the fact that her son has just come home after so long), but there is much more to her then meets the eye. Neal never lets us see all of Pat and that helps her performance quite a lot. In her face, we see generations of sadness and repression. She beautifully rips off layer after layer until we see who she is (Or at least enough after her) and she has many great moments, especially when her husband (Jack Albertson) brings her the roses and when they get into a fight after a night on the town. She is so haunting in the scene where she runs away, it's quite sad, and she never says a word through out the whole thing! Her monolugue when she comes home is a terrific moment as well.

Patricia Neal gives a brilliant, deeply layered performance which is quite haunting which gets

Note: I know I did Kate's profile earlier, but I decided to delete it and do Neal's instead because I didn't pay attention through out the whole thing and I was a bit disappointed by her and that might be because of the fact that I didn't pay attention to all of it and stopped it too much . So, Kate will be last instead.

Best Actress 1968: Vanessa Redgrave in Isadora

Vanessa Redgrave received her second Oscar nomination for playing Isadora Duncan, a controversial dancer with an out of control private life in Isadora.


Isadora is an extremely exhausting, and long movie which doesn't really work because it never tells it's story in a way that makes the story feel complete. Isadora Duncan is a selfish, annoying woman who is really unlikeable, but strangely, Vanessa Redgrave gives a superb performance despite being in a trainwreck of a movie. She pretty much plays multiple roles since the movie constantly flashes back and forth. Redgrave captures Isadora's free spirit and intelligence and how she treats her life as though it were a stage. Her best scenes, I think, are in the beginning, when Isadora is first starting out to be a dancer. Isadora catches people off guard with her unusual views and strange personality and Redgrave makes us see that Isadora is a fiery intelligent woman who does what she wants to do. She also is totally convincing as her older self, a washed up, unhinged woman who is very hard to control. She does show how Isadora is also a deeper person at times then she seems , like for example, when she has children, you can see she loves and cares about them deeply.


Vanessa Redgrave gives a superb, completely real performance which rises above her mediocre movie which gets


And I'm REALLY sorry about this huge delay which can be explained by one word: LAZINESS! I was bored and slacked off when I watched the film, but the fact that's it's so long added to my stalling of finally finishing it. Anyway, Kate's profile will hopefully be up tomorrow and I might do Neal after her, but I'll make one last try to find The Subject Was Roses before then.

Best Actress 1968

The next year I'll be doing a profile/ranking on is 1968 and the nominees were:

Katharine Hepburn in The Lion In Winter

Patricia Neal in The Subject Was Roses

Vanessa Redgrave in Isadora

Barbara Streisand in Funny Girl

Joanne Woodward in Rachel, Rachel



















Note: I couldn't find a good enough picture of Neal in The Subject Was Roses, so I just uploaded one of her instead. And speaking of her, I saw The Subject Was Roses on TCM in March or February, and since it's extremely hard to find, I won't be able to rewatch it. But I'll try my hardest to look for it at every video store I go to and it would be really great if I did find it. But odds are that I will most likely do her profile on memory, although I'll watch some of the trailer so I can remember more of her. But I can remember her really well though, so it probably won't matter.


Anyway, who do you predict? Who is your pick and who are you rooting for?

Best Actress 2003: Final Thoughts

2003 was an okay year. Charlize was easily the best of the competition although Keaton would have been a worthy winner too. The rest did not deserve they're nominations. Well, not really. I don't have a problem with Watts and Castle-Hughes nominations, although I probably wouldn't have nominated them. I don't understand why Morton was nominated, but it's nice to see a surprise nomination. A weaker year then 93, but more interesting and the films are overall better, though that doesn't say much.


My ranking of the films:

1. Something's Gotta Give

2. Monster

3. Whale Rider

4. 21 Gramms

5. In America

Best Actress 2003: The Resolution!

5. Samantha Morton in In America: Samantha Morton has some very good moments and is sometimes heartbreaking , but her role is very underwritten which really limits her ability to get an above-okay performance.








4. Keisha Castle-Hughes in Whale Rider: Keisha Castle-Hughes is very good for most of the film, and she's very real and convincing, but her approach to the character is wrong and she is very underwhelming at points.






3. Naomi Watts in 21 Gramms: Watts gives a great performance in the beginning, but loses her spark once the film starts becoming a mess, and starts to overract badly.






2. Diane Keaton in Something's Gotta Give: Diane Keaton's gives a luminous, wonderful portrayal which is totally enjoyable. Her chemistry with Jack Nicholson is superb.







1. Charlize Theron in Monster: Charlize Theron delivers a powerful, completely real performance which is haunting. An amazing achievement.