![]() |
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Let's hope a bunch of old Academy members didn't award Paquin the Oscar for her body.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by GoldenJCJ
(Post 12616381)
Let's hope a bunch of old Academy members didn't award Paquin the Oscar for her body.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by rw2516
(Post 12615748)
Disagree about Connery. He steals the movie with his performance. From the day the movie was released people were taking about him being a shoo-in for the Oscar.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by inri222
(Post 12615959)
Over Marlon Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire, I disagree. I may be wrong about body of work but Bogart's African Queen Oscar sure as hell was a make-up .
He should have won for Casablanca or he should have been nominated in 1948 for The Treasure of the Sierra Madre and won. Not for nothing but Bogart's best performance by a good bit was as Dixon Steele in Nick Ray's In A Lonely Place a year earlier than African Queen. It's a performance I WOULD put up against Brando in Streetcar. |
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by rw2516
(Post 12615938)
Newman only got his because Color of Money was a sequel and he reprised a role that was Oscar worthy in the original. He was given the award for The Hustler, not his body of work. Had Color of Money not been a sequel he would have lost again. He wasn't out to pasture yet and the Academy would have waited another 10 years and given him an honorary. I believe the thinking was, "He's doing Fast Eddie again, let's give it to him now." He would have won if he'd made Hud 2, The Verdict 2, etc. no matter how good the films were. But they had to be a sequel to one of his previous nominated roles.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by rw2516
(Post 12615748)
Disagree about Connery. He steals the movie with his performance. From the day the movie was released people were taking about him being a shoo-in for the Oscar.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by Sean O'Hara
(Post 12616853)
More importantly, Connery didn't have a huge, Oscar-worthy body of work that he'd been overlooked for. The Wind and the Lion, The Man Who Would Be King, and Robin and Marian are the only ones you could even make a case for, and it wouldn't be a strong case.
He won it for the same reason Sandra Bullock and Julia Roberts did. While both are decent actors, neither has a great body of work, but their body of work is definitely why they got their Oscars. The performances and movies weren't spectacular but they were both huge stars with very high grossing filmographies. Neither deserved their Oscars and Julia Roberts winning out over Ellen Burstyn is the closest the Oscars have come to commiting a felony. |
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by stvn1974
(Post 12616260)
Martin Landau for Ed Wood is the fist that pops into mind.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by Chadm
(Post 12616838)
Not for nothing but Bogart's best performance by a good bit was as Dixon Steele in Nick Ray's In A Lonely Place a year earlier than African Queen. It's a performance I WOULD put up against Brando in Streetcar.
Originally Posted by Chadm
(Post 12616872)
Julia Roberts winning out over Ellen Burstyn is the closest the Oscars have come to commiting a felony.
Originally Posted by Ash Ketchum
(Post 12616873)
Actually he got the award for Bela Lugosi's body of work.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Patrick Stewart for Wolverine III.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
I disagree about Newman in the Color of Money. I think he really deserved to win for that movie as he was exceptional in it. Sure he had been in a number of movies prior that were Oscar Worthy as well, but i don't think he was given the award simply to make up for it here.
Connery certainly did get the award for his body of work, and whilst he was fine in the movie i didn't think it was Oscar worthy. Looking at his competition that year though is interesting. Denzel for Cry Freedom (too early in his career i think to win), Morgan Freeman for Streetsmart (Excellent in the movie, but not the kind of character the Academy would probably like to award), Albert Brooks for Broadcast News (Good movie, but not his best role...he should have won for Drive), and Vincent Gardenia for Moonstruck (Meh!!!). So looking at his competition i would say it was probably one of the most obvious wins ever. |
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
The ultimate answer to this question : Helen Hayes for Best Supporting Actress in Airport (1970).
- she was The First Lady of American Theater and one of 12 EGOT winners, but winning an Oscar for about eight minutes as a little old lady on an airplane was kind of embarrassing. Do you even remember her? I don't. (She'd won the Best Actress Oscar in 1932 previously). She didn't even bother to attend the ceremony and lived another 20 years. Along the same lines : Ingrid Bergman for Best Supporting Actress in Murder on the Orient Express (1974). She was an all-time great, obviously, and had won twice previously. Even she didn't think she deserved this one and was embarrassed to win, apologizing to Day For Night's Valentina Cortese for winning during her acceptance speech. <iframe width="420" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ky5sW4no_cg" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Liz Taylor won for Butterfield 8 (1960) and most people think it's the worst lead performance to ever win an Oscar. I forget the details, but she had been very sick and it was more of an Oscar for living than for the work in that dreadful film. Thankfully, she won a deriving Oscar in 1966 for Who's Afraid of Viginia Woolf?. I'd also add Meryl Streep for The Iron Lady. Sure she's the best, has a record number of nominations and had won twice previously, but there was a sentiment that she was passed over several times in the previous 25-30 years because everyone just knows how great she is and this one kind of felt like a make-up Oscar since it wasn't near her best work. She should have won for Devil Wears Prada and for Adaptation instead. |
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
BTW : It's not always the worst thing to win an Oscar for a career's work either. I was DELIGHTED when Paul Newman finally won his acting Oscar. He was way past due. If his buddy Robert Redford wins Best Supporting Actor next year for Truth (it would only be the second acting nomination of his entire career), I'll be smiling ear-to-ear.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by Solid Snake
(Post 12615757)
John Wayne for True Grit
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Redford i think is truly a great actor and its a shame that he does not get the award recognition he deserves.
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Dame Judi Dench for her cameo in Shakespeare in Love
|
Re: Acting Oscars that were really awarded because of a body of work
Originally Posted by Decker
(Post 12617003)
Liz Taylor won for Butterfield 8 (1960) and most people think it's the worst lead performance to ever win an Oscar. I forget the details, but she had been very sick and it was more of an Oscar for living than for the work in that dreadful film. [/B]. |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:48 PM. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.