Not a lot as I recall. Nominations for foreign language performances are hard to come by so her absence was not surprising.mayukh wrote:Sorry to resurrect this thread, but just a question for those who were around at the time – was NSFC/BSFC winner and NYFCC runner-up (albeit in supporting) Marilia Pera able to gain any traction at all for Pixote? She certainly gave the year's greatest female performance.
Best Actress 1981
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
Sorry to resurrect this thread, but just a question for those who were around at the time – was NSFC/BSFC winner and NYFCC runner-up (albeit in supporting) Marilia Pera able to gain any traction at all for Pixote? She certainly gave the year's greatest female performance.
In lieu of her absence, I give my vote to Sarandon. She’s a fascinating performer and presence, and her performance here has a feeling of rawness, of carnality that's absent from some of her later roles.
Edited By mayukh on 1299797825
In lieu of her absence, I give my vote to Sarandon. She’s a fascinating performer and presence, and her performance here has a feeling of rawness, of carnality that's absent from some of her later roles.
Edited By mayukh on 1299797825
Last edited by mayukh on Sat Aug 13, 2011 12:15 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Haven't seen Only When I Laugh. Didn't know there was any reason to. I don't like Neil Simon that much. And I really don't like Marsha Mason. So...I'm just going to let this one go by the wayside and assume she's terrible.
On Golden Pond is one of my least favorite movies ever. Henry Fonda is perfectly fine in the kind of role that literally anyone could have done and has no business getting anywhere near the podium in the year of Burt Lancaster's glorious performance. Katherine Hepburn is on-screen. That's the most you can say. She's there. She says things. She sounds like Katherine Hepburn. What she says and does is nothing is nothing you ever wanted to hear or see.
I like Meryl Streep more than most people on this board but I can't say that The French Lieutenant's Woman makes the best use of her. Italiano may very well be right that she would be made better use of in Europe in lieu of the glorified Hallmark films she's made her meat and potatoes prior to this decade. I will vote for her later on for The Bridges of Madison County.
That means it's down to Susan Sarandon in Atlantic City and Diane Keaton in Reds. I like both these films very much. I will vote for Sarandon for Thelma & Louise. I voted for Keaton for Annie Hall. I find them both incredibly attractive in both films. I think Reds has its problems and Keaton comes across too easily as a nag, but it's still a very interesting, strong performance in an underrated film. I think Sarandon is fairly perfect in a not incredibly challenging role that served as harbinger of better things to come. I was unaware that Atlantic City has lost some of its esteem over the years. I love it.
Flip a coin and go with Keaton.
On Golden Pond is one of my least favorite movies ever. Henry Fonda is perfectly fine in the kind of role that literally anyone could have done and has no business getting anywhere near the podium in the year of Burt Lancaster's glorious performance. Katherine Hepburn is on-screen. That's the most you can say. She's there. She says things. She sounds like Katherine Hepburn. What she says and does is nothing is nothing you ever wanted to hear or see.
I like Meryl Streep more than most people on this board but I can't say that The French Lieutenant's Woman makes the best use of her. Italiano may very well be right that she would be made better use of in Europe in lieu of the glorified Hallmark films she's made her meat and potatoes prior to this decade. I will vote for her later on for The Bridges of Madison County.
That means it's down to Susan Sarandon in Atlantic City and Diane Keaton in Reds. I like both these films very much. I will vote for Sarandon for Thelma & Louise. I voted for Keaton for Annie Hall. I find them both incredibly attractive in both films. I think Reds has its problems and Keaton comes across too easily as a nag, but it's still a very interesting, strong performance in an underrated film. I think Sarandon is fairly perfect in a not incredibly challenging role that served as harbinger of better things to come. I was unaware that Atlantic City has lost some of its esteem over the years. I love it.
Flip a coin and go with Keaton.
"How's the despair?"
It's not a gay thing. Faye Dunaway in Mommie Dearest, I mean. It's an American gay thing; I don't know anyone in Europe who even remotely thinks that it was even just a good performance. We have our camp icons, too, and (though I hope it is a clichè) some may even share this love/fear for castrating mothers; but Mommie Dearest is a bit too much honestly (and I used to complain about this board's love for Auntie Mame!). I'm not saying that one shouldnt enjoy or even love Mommie Dearest, and I'm certainly not judgemental about this, but mistaking one's private fantasy for high art is something else, and it disturbs me. As for the performance itself, it's certainly committed, but the material is so depressingly bad, and the director so conspicuously absent, that some distance from the character would have helped. No, definitely not award worthy.
Thank God Dunaway wasnt nominated. Marsha Mason was, and hers wasnt a better performance. Only When I Laugh is Neil Simon at his most desperate; the laughs werent enough, he wanted tears now, too. He gave his wife this "big" (in his intentions), showy role, complete with drunk scenes, telephone scenes, the usual jokes, ANYTHING to prove her talent. Dreadful material of course; but also in Only When I Laugh James Coco, while far from great, can still manage to create, at times, a believable human being. The much more limited Mason sinks with her movie.
Hepburn's Best Actress Oscar is one of the worst ever. Or was; some recent winners are more or less on the same level. But by then she was a national monument, and the safe choice for those to whom a second Oscar to either Streep or Keaton would have been too soon (Streep could win nowadays for similar reasons).
Sarandon was good in a great movie, but the choice, back then and now, should be between Meryl Streep and Diane Keaton. Streep was impressive as always, and it's still one of her legendary roles; but especially today I find Harold Pinter's coldly intellectual approach more interesting than really effective. Keaton is of course a much warmer presence, her portrayal of a confused, contradictory woman was affecting, and the movie she was in very, very good. I voted for her.
Thank God Dunaway wasnt nominated. Marsha Mason was, and hers wasnt a better performance. Only When I Laugh is Neil Simon at his most desperate; the laughs werent enough, he wanted tears now, too. He gave his wife this "big" (in his intentions), showy role, complete with drunk scenes, telephone scenes, the usual jokes, ANYTHING to prove her talent. Dreadful material of course; but also in Only When I Laugh James Coco, while far from great, can still manage to create, at times, a believable human being. The much more limited Mason sinks with her movie.
Hepburn's Best Actress Oscar is one of the worst ever. Or was; some recent winners are more or less on the same level. But by then she was a national monument, and the safe choice for those to whom a second Oscar to either Streep or Keaton would have been too soon (Streep could win nowadays for similar reasons).
Sarandon was good in a great movie, but the choice, back then and now, should be between Meryl Streep and Diane Keaton. Streep was impressive as always, and it's still one of her legendary roles; but especially today I find Harold Pinter's coldly intellectual approach more interesting than really effective. Keaton is of course a much warmer presence, her portrayal of a confused, contradictory woman was affecting, and the movie she was in very, very good. I voted for her.
-
Mister Tee
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8672
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
Well, in the famous phrase, Nobody's perfect.Eric wrote:Abstaining in protest. Faye Dunaway's performance in Mommie Dearest is without question the single finest piece of acting ever committed to film. Mister Tee, you know I respect your opinions on just about everything, but baseball allegiance and the value of camp are two singular exceptions.
This race lost all relevance when Faye Dunaway’s great performance wasn’t included. What makes her work in Mommie Dearest so magnificent is that she captures both the frightening gargoyle that Christina perceived her to be AND the steely strength and determination which Joan self-admiringly saw in herself. I don’t consider Dunaway’s performance itself to be camp – what she did (superbly) was the capture and convey the campy elements of Crawford herself, both as a person and as an actress. And as opposed to the crazy harridan Christina’s book, because of Dunaway’s depth we can feel an inner poignancy about this woman.
Other than his dismissal of Dunaway, I’m pretty much in agreement with Tee’s take on this year’s race. I often love Keaton, but she never convinced me that she was a strong-willed radical and feminist – there wasn’t enough force or resolve in her acting. (By contrast, I think Beatty and Nicholson give arguably career-best performances.)
At this point, I was still enthralled by Meryl Streep (I thought she deserved a Best Actress nomination in 1979 for The Seduction of Joe Tynan to go along with her Supporting nod for Kramer vs. Kramer. (She first lost me with her awful cupboard full of mannerisms in Sophie’s Choice, but more on that next year.) I sort of liked her in The French Lieutenant’s Woman – an interesting failure of a film – and she had a nice ethereal quality but she also seemed too distant and dispassionate.
I loathed Atlantic City. Louis Malle’s characteristic coldness was all too prominent and John Guare’s snarky script was condescending and puerile. Sarandon was the one likable element of the film, but was no great shakes.
Katharine Hepburn - phah!! Not having seen the play – and liking some of Mark Rydell’s films – I was shocked and appalled at how awful On Golden Pond was. Completely unconvincing, smarmy, embarrassingly calculated, it also contains one of Henry Fonda’s very few less-than-excellent performances (in fact, he’s barely passable) . Hepburn gave many more lousy performances than Fonda over the years, but she’s not as bad as he is here, partly because her role isn’t as extended as his and the lines Ernest Thompson wrote for the wife aren’t as excruciating as those given to the patriarch. By no means a good performance, she does border on the passable. (And I agree with Tee on that hideous kid – anytime he talked about “sucking face” I wanted to smash his face with a 4 by 5.
Marsha Mason – not even worth mentioning.
I guess Meryl Streep gets my unenthusiastic vote.
My own choices (does this sound like a gay man’s list to you?):
1. Faye Dunaway in Mommie Dearest
2. Candice Bergen in Rich and Famous
3. Julie Andrews in S.O.B.
4. Bernadette Peters in Pennies From Heaven
5. Glenda Jackson in Stevie (although if just including Oscar-eligibles, then Sissy Spacek in Raggedy Man)
Other than his dismissal of Dunaway, I’m pretty much in agreement with Tee’s take on this year’s race. I often love Keaton, but she never convinced me that she was a strong-willed radical and feminist – there wasn’t enough force or resolve in her acting. (By contrast, I think Beatty and Nicholson give arguably career-best performances.)
At this point, I was still enthralled by Meryl Streep (I thought she deserved a Best Actress nomination in 1979 for The Seduction of Joe Tynan to go along with her Supporting nod for Kramer vs. Kramer. (She first lost me with her awful cupboard full of mannerisms in Sophie’s Choice, but more on that next year.) I sort of liked her in The French Lieutenant’s Woman – an interesting failure of a film – and she had a nice ethereal quality but she also seemed too distant and dispassionate.
I loathed Atlantic City. Louis Malle’s characteristic coldness was all too prominent and John Guare’s snarky script was condescending and puerile. Sarandon was the one likable element of the film, but was no great shakes.
Katharine Hepburn - phah!! Not having seen the play – and liking some of Mark Rydell’s films – I was shocked and appalled at how awful On Golden Pond was. Completely unconvincing, smarmy, embarrassingly calculated, it also contains one of Henry Fonda’s very few less-than-excellent performances (in fact, he’s barely passable) . Hepburn gave many more lousy performances than Fonda over the years, but she’s not as bad as he is here, partly because her role isn’t as extended as his and the lines Ernest Thompson wrote for the wife aren’t as excruciating as those given to the patriarch. By no means a good performance, she does border on the passable. (And I agree with Tee on that hideous kid – anytime he talked about “sucking face” I wanted to smash his face with a 4 by 5.
Marsha Mason – not even worth mentioning.
I guess Meryl Streep gets my unenthusiastic vote.
My own choices (does this sound like a gay man’s list to you?):
1. Faye Dunaway in Mommie Dearest
2. Candice Bergen in Rich and Famous
3. Julie Andrews in S.O.B.
4. Bernadette Peters in Pennies From Heaven
5. Glenda Jackson in Stevie (although if just including Oscar-eligibles, then Sissy Spacek in Raggedy Man)
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
LOL.Mister Tee wrote:And you think we disagreed on Cheri? I'd have let that kid be waterboarded without blinking an eye. One of the most repellent child performances I've ever seen.Big Magilla wrote:On Golden Pond has such a hokey script that its success stands or falls on its actors. Even child actor Doug McKeon excels here
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
-
Mister Tee
- Tenured Laureate
- Posts: 8672
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
- Location: NYC
- Contact:
And you think we disagreed on Cheri? I'd have let that kid be waterboarded without blinking an eye. One of the most repellent child performances I've ever seen.Big Magilla wrote:On Golden Pond has such a hokey script that its success stands or falls on its actors. Even child actor Doug McKeon excels here
-
The Original BJ
- Emeritus
- Posts: 4312
- Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm
Mister Tee wrote:Before I start trashing the actual nominees, I'll throw in that I'd also never have voted for the camp-fest that was Dunaway in Mommie Dearest. I've never understood how that performance was allowed to be viewed simultaneously as a hoot (with Halloween ads urging audiences to come see "the biggest mother of them all") and yet serious enough to run second in the NY critics' voting. Not remotely to my taste.
I think it takes a gay man to truly appreciate that performance, Tee.
Edited By flipp525 on 1258484165
"The mantle of spinsterhood was definitely in her shoulders. She was twenty five and looked it."
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-Gone With the Wind by Margaret Mitchell
-
Big Magilla
- Site Admin
- Posts: 19371
- Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
- Location: Jersey Shore
I loved Dunaway's deliciously over-the-top portrayal of Joan Crawford in Mommie Dearest.
I also loved Sissy Spacek's performance in Raggedy Man, a film I had confused for years with Violets Are Blue, a dreary mess of a film also directed by her husband.
Others I liked a lot: Lisa Eichhorn in Cutter's Way, though that's pretty much a supporting performance and Kathleen Turner in Body Heat, though it seemed at the time Turner would have a long star career with many more Oscar opportunities ahead of her.
Onto the actual nominees:
I though Marsha Mason did a fairly decent job with an impossibly written character in Only When I Laugh but it was not an Oscar caliber performance, certainly not one that was worthy of a fourth nomination - her third in five years.
I thought Susan Sarandon was a revelation in Atlantic City, but it was a supporting role.
I liked Meryl Streep in the film-within-a-film in The French Lieutenant's Woman, not so much in the "present".
I thought Diane Keaton was terrific in Reds, the year's best film, but the scope of the film sort of overwhelms her.
That brings me to Katharine Hepburn in On Golden Pond. While not one of her great performances, it is a very good one. On Golden Pond has such a hokey script that its success stands or falls on its actors. Even child actor Doug McKeon excels here, no doubt inspired by the work of the film's stars.
Hepburn and Henry Fonda had never worked together before, but they fit together like a pair of comfortable old shoes. As has been said about every actor she ever worked with from Cary Grant to Peter O'Toole, Hepburn brings out the best in her co-stars. It's impossible to watch On Golden Pond with other actors, even good ones like Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer who fail miserably in the TV remake, and not wonder what all the excitement was about in 1981. It was about the combination of Hepburn and Fonda, Fonda and Hepburn, and they're magic together. She gets my vote, and a very enthusiastic one at that.
I also loved Sissy Spacek's performance in Raggedy Man, a film I had confused for years with Violets Are Blue, a dreary mess of a film also directed by her husband.
Others I liked a lot: Lisa Eichhorn in Cutter's Way, though that's pretty much a supporting performance and Kathleen Turner in Body Heat, though it seemed at the time Turner would have a long star career with many more Oscar opportunities ahead of her.
Onto the actual nominees:
I though Marsha Mason did a fairly decent job with an impossibly written character in Only When I Laugh but it was not an Oscar caliber performance, certainly not one that was worthy of a fourth nomination - her third in five years.
I thought Susan Sarandon was a revelation in Atlantic City, but it was a supporting role.
I liked Meryl Streep in the film-within-a-film in The French Lieutenant's Woman, not so much in the "present".
I thought Diane Keaton was terrific in Reds, the year's best film, but the scope of the film sort of overwhelms her.
That brings me to Katharine Hepburn in On Golden Pond. While not one of her great performances, it is a very good one. On Golden Pond has such a hokey script that its success stands or falls on its actors. Even child actor Doug McKeon excels here, no doubt inspired by the work of the film's stars.
Hepburn and Henry Fonda had never worked together before, but they fit together like a pair of comfortable old shoes. As has been said about every actor she ever worked with from Cary Grant to Peter O'Toole, Hepburn brings out the best in her co-stars. It's impossible to watch On Golden Pond with other actors, even good ones like Julie Andrews and Christopher Plummer who fail miserably in the TV remake, and not wonder what all the excitement was about in 1981. It was about the combination of Hepburn and Fonda, Fonda and Hepburn, and they're magic together. She gets my vote, and a very enthusiastic one at that.