Monday, August 23, 2010

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


Twister said...

Joe, don't worry -- I took about two months to finish the 1988 Smackdown!

For supporting years...I say maybe 69, 78, or 90...just a few.

joe burns said...


can't do 69 or 79, and I don't think I can do 90, but I'll check!

Fritz said...

Great work! And don't worry, I also need more time at the moment!

Malcolm said...

For lead years:
1950, 1951, 1953, 1957, 1965, 1967, 1973 , 1975, 1977, 1978, 1980, 1982, 1985, 1986, 1987, 1990, 1991, 1992, 1993, 1994 , 1995, 1996, 1997, 1998, 2000, 2004, 2005 , 2007, 2008, 2009

For Supporting Years:

2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 1998, 1996, 1994, 1993, 1992 , 1990, 1988 , 1987, 1985, 1983, 1982 , 1979, 1978, 1976, 1975, 1974, 1973, 1968, 1967, 1966, 1962, 1961, 1957, 1956, 1952, 1951, 1950.

Well, these are just suggestions. Anyway, I'd still read your posts because you write really well. More power to you!

Louis Morgan said...

I was not surprised by your choice, but I was by the ranking a little bit. I have only seen Hepburn but I agree she is brilliant.

Also I hope you do a lead actor year eventually, as you said you might do, I think that would be very interesting to see.

dinasztie said...

I'm a bit surprised about the ranking (not Hepburn's win of course). Great work!

You could also do 1948 and I can give links to all of the movies. It's not the strongest year ever but it is very versatile and controversial.

joe burns said...

Fritz: Thanks!

Malcolm: Wow, that's a lot! 51, 53, 57 (This isn't possible for anyone except Sage, Wild Is The Wind hasn't even been released on VHS yet!), 1973, 1980, 1986, 1987, and 1994 aren't possible for me to do in Leading right now, but the others are!

1994, 1992, 1987, 1985, 1978, 1976, 1975, 1966, 1952, and 1951 aren't possible for me to do in Supporting right now, but the rest are, and one of them is the one I have in mind, but I haven't decided yet, so I'll take your suggestions into account.

Louis: What surprised you? And I will eventually, most likely after the year I'll do next.

Dinasztie: Thanks! And we'll see, I think.

Louis Morgan said...

I basically thought Redgrave would be third and definitely not fifth, that's all.

Anonymous said...

I was surprised Babs didn't rank last since she usually does with alot of people's rankings.

joe burns said...

Really? Well, I wouldn't know anyway. But I thought that she did more with her performance then Redgrave did and was more enjoyable.