I would like to hear your opinions on who should've won the Oscar: Anne Bancroft in "The Miracle Worker" or Geraldine Page in "Sweet Bird of Youth." I enjoyed Bancroft's performance, but I thought Page's performance was extraordinary. It really kept me wanting to see more scenes of her.
share[deleted]
Of course today, just the opposite would be true. Hookers, murderers, drug addicts are some of Hollywood's favorite people. Gee, I wonder why:)
Page definatly deserved the Oscar.
Page has power, and is the best thing in this gaudy over-produced and watered down movie version of TW's play. She's enjoyably over-the-top but, somewhat mannered and monotonous. I think winner Bancroft,and nominees Davis(Baby Jane), and Hepburn (Long Day's Journey into Night)were equally deserving. No robbery here. Page's nominated performances in Summer and Smoke (61),Interiors (78), and The Pope of Greenwich Village (84) were also deserving of the Oscar. She's also excellent in The Beguiled(71). I agree on one point: I wanted to see more of Page, and less of the supporting characters who dominate and clutter this film version of the play.
shareIt was a great year for actresses and I think all were equally great and deserving, I especially liked Kat Hepburn's performance (her performance here is far more deserving than half of oscars she actually won, but that is another story...). So like said a poster before, there is no robbery here, Bancroft is a solid winner !
But you can always find better elsewhere, these (great) performances are nothing compared to Meena Kumari's tour de force performance in King, Queen and Slave or in a lesser extent Anna Magnani's brillance in Mamma Roma (both movies released the same year) !
odd that you leave out her actual Oscar win for "Trip to Bountiful" which proves why she is such a top notch performer.
shareI didn't mention Trip to Bountiful because it's not my favorite performance, and the film is tedious; a Hallmark Hall of Shame presentation that made its way to the big screen. Many actors receive Oscars for what is not their best or most memorable or iconic... i.e. Al Pacino won for Scent of a Woman, but was not even nominated for Donnie Brasco likewise Dustin Hoffman in Straight Time and Paul Newman won for The Color of Money, but he's so much better in Slapshot, Hud, Cool Hand Luke, and the Verdict and Morgan Freeman's Oscar Winning performance in Million Dollar Baby is forgettable vs. Street Smart, The Shawshank Redemption and Driving Miss Daisy.
shareHer performance in Whatever Happened to Aunt Alice?(1969) is a must for Page fans even if the movie feels like a made4TVfilm.
shareAll nominees that year were fantastic, HOWEVER; I feel that Bette Davis was ROBBED that year; she deserved to win her third Oscar for "Baby Jane"; and she was never nominated again after that.
No, no..."cruelty." I always think that has a nobler ring to it.
[deleted]
I agree, Hepburn's performance was powerful and haunting;the best dramatic performance she's ever given(and I think she would agree). She probably did deserve to win for this. I saw Vanessa Redgrave's acclaimed performance in a revival on Broadway but, feel that Hepburn's performance is definitive. Hepburn moved me, Redgrave didn't.
share1963 was a year with all 5 oscar-deserving performances by an leading actress.
I just saw on TCM(LA) 'sweet bird of youth', and I think that miss Page is one of great forgotten actress; she was fantastic at this, and although bancroft did a great job, geraldine really deserved this year'award.
If ever there was a Best Actress line-up that truly deserved a 5-way tie, this was the year. However, I think that there really isn't any competition because Katharine Hepburn's performance is legendary, flawless, and completely authentic. While that year was rare because all 5 nominees deserved their nominations, Hepburn really was in a class by herself. But I'm not really upset that she lost, because all 5 performances were superb.
But I should also say that although these were terrific performances, what's more important is that they were excellent roles to begin with. It seems like it just depends on what year you're talking about when discussing the availability of good female roles; they come and go.
In my opinion, that was one of the strongest Best Actress races ever. Each performance was absolutely memorable: Kate Hepburn in "Long Day's Journey Into Night"; Anne Bancroft in "The Miracle Worker"; Lee Remick in "Days of Wine and Roses"; Page in "Sweet Bird of Youth" and Bette Davis in "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane"?? Wow, I barely remember such a sensational bunch of nominees. Besides, with the exception of "Long Day's Journey...", they were in excellent movies as well, something that's rarely seen nowadays.
1967 and 1968 come to mind as two extraordinary years as well.
[deleted]
Everybody was equally deserving, but if I had been a member of the Academy, I would have voted for Geraldine Page. She was stunning, extraordinary, marvellous. What a performance! She outacted everyone in that movie, completely, the others, who gave excellent performances, seemed to be bad compared to her.
shareWho should have won what ?! Awards were made for schoolgirls...
shareI thought Page was terrific (well, when wasn't she?), but 1962 was one helluva year for the ladies, and it's almost impossible to watch any of the nominated performances and not wish it had won. However, with all due respect to the winner, I still wish Bette Davis had won, though, because it would have given BABY JANE some legitimacy and would likely have altered the trajectory of Davis's career in a more positive way.
"Stone-cold sober I find myself absolutely fascinating!"---Katharine Hepburn