Should George have won the Oscar? - The Sunshine Boys (1976) Discussion

[–] jrs-8 17 years ago

Burns won because the studio got him placed in the Supporting category when he clearly has one of the leads (along with Matthau). He was good but I think he got the award more as a career recognition then anything else. If Burns had been bumped to the leading category I would have liked to see Richard Benjamin get a nod for this film. He was wonderful in it.

reply

[–] ModernWhimsy 17 years ago

Ech. I hate that. Brad Dourif gave the performance of a lifetime.

reply

[–] slokes 16 years ago

Poor Robert Shaw wasn't even nominated.

The only actor who beat Burns that year was Richard Benjamin. He won the Golden Globe for best supporting actor in the same film Burns was in.

reply

[–] dinasztie13 16 years ago

I think George Burns was perfect and he would have deserved the Oscar if Chris Sarandon hadn't been nominated. Burns was just the second best but I prefer him to Brad Dourif (I think he was excellent but nothing special compared to Jack Nicholson os Louise Fletcher). I think Chris Sarandon deserved it, though his role was quite short but he could show something even compared to Al Pacino (who also should have won). 1976 was a tough year at the Oscars all of the movies deserved to win (especially the actually winner th Cockoo and Nashville), there should have been a tie between Jack Nicholson, Al Pacino and Walter Matthau, Lily Tomlin and Ronnee Blakely should have won, the only obvious choice was Louise Fletcher's win. One of the best Oscar years ever.

reply

[–] teejay6682 16 years ago

i loved george burns in this film but it seems more to be a career oscar win like morgan freeman for "million dollar baby" then anything else. brad dourif is great so i think he probably should have won though.

reply

[–] mp01 13 years ago

Just finished watching this. Academy should've just given him a lifetime achievement award to people they usually snub like Hitchcock and later feel guilty about it

reply

[–] rtcnz 15 years ago

Based on performance, Brad Dourif should have gotten it.

BUT as an actor, George Burns.

reply

[–] A-Town8814 15 years ago

Brad Dourif.

reply

[–] WarpedRecord 15 years ago

Another vote for Brad Dourif (interesting, considering this is the board for "The Sunshine Boys"). George was clearly the sentimental favorite, and it appears it was "now or never" time for the Oscars. Really, it is odd George didn't have more nominations throughout his career, but he was perhaps more a TV than film star.

As for Brad, it is unfortunate that he still has not taken home an Oscar because he is generally the best part of his films and turn a lot of crap into ... well, very worthwhile crap. Maybe it's not such a big surprise after all that Brad has never won, though he's an excellent actor.

reply

[–] filmmekker 14 years ago

It probably WAS sentimental award. Where George Burns SHOULD have won the Oscar was for Going In Style from 1979. In that he gives the performance of a lifetime, acting Lee Strasberg off the screen.

Open the door for Mr. Muckle!!

reply

[–] WarpedRecord 14 years ago

I absolutely agree that George Burns was superb in "Going in Style," and he wasn't even nominated. Of course, what an embarrassment of riches that year: Dustin Hoffman (the winner), Roy Scheider, Peter Sellers and Jack Lemmon.

It's interesting that I've seen Lee Strasberg in a handful of films, including this one, and he's never had a standout performance. He launched a lot of talent through the Actors Studio, but his own roles have never been that memorable. That's not to discount his talent as an actor or a teacher. I just find it curious.

reply

[–] Godfather_200 12 years ago

He deserved the Oscar, This was a weak field and really it was between him, Brad Dourif and Chris Sarandon. He played off Walter Matthau really well.

reply

[–] intexor 12 years ago

Between those two, I probably would give it to George Burns.

reply

[–] sirjeremy 11 years ago

I haven't seen Sarandon and Meredith's performances yet but between the other three, Dourif definitely should have won for his indelible and very poignant work in Cuckoo's Nest. I just watched The Sunshine Boys yesterday and honestly, it felt like Burns was reciting his dialogue from cue cards. The Academy love giving the sentimental favourites the award in that category, especially if they're getting on so I think nobody really had a good shot at beating him. His film was also a big hit.

Poor Richard Benjamin - his best chance of an Oscar nomination and he gets screwed over because they pushed Burns in supporting so he wouldn't compete with Matthau. For me he gave the best performance in the film and I'd have liked to have seen him or Henry Gibson or Robert Shaw nominated in place of Burns.

reply

[–] aworgill 11 years ago

Agreed. Burns was fine in the role, but the Oscars are all about the sentimentality and drama within the show, so unless someone is indisputably the best, it's gonna go to the people who can create a moment, or who have had illustrious careers and never won, or the first transgender of Laotian descent. Burns was likable and old and hadn't been seen on film in three decades. I'm of the opinion that Sunshine Boys itself is highly overrated.

reply

[–] don-lockwood 9 years ago

No. Dourif or Sarandon or Shaw. John Cazale also should've been nominated. Burns was just playing himself with occasional Alzheimer's and giving good, dry responses to Matthau's bickering. Though I'm okay with him being considered supporting.

reply