WHO THINKS BETTE SHOULDA WON THE OSCAR? - For the Boys (1991) Discussion

[–] chemiche3 19 years ago

She was great in it, no doubt. Was she nominated for the role?

reply

Yes, she was nominated for an Oscar for this role.. and yes, she should have won. She is incredibly talented and needs to do more movies like this one. What a showcase of Bette's talents!

reply

[–] heaintloveu 19 years ago

Don't forget she won a Golden Globe for the role (Best Actress, Musical or Comedy).

As far as saying she "should have won," well, I might beg to differ. Jodie Foster actally won, for "Silence of the Lambs," and I think rightfully so. Susan Sarandon was wonderful in "Thelma and Louise." Geena Davis, in the same movie, I really have no opinion of, and Laura Dern was excellent as well in "Rambling Rose."

I think Bette comes in second, probably tying with Susan Sarandon. Then would come Laura Dern, and finally Geena Davis.

reply

[–] Isaac5855 17 years ago

I think Bette comes in second, probably tying with Susan Sarandon. Then would come Laura Dern, and finally Geena Davis

As I already mentioned, Bette deserved the nomination, but if it had been up to me, Susan Sarandon would have won...it was the best performance by an actress in a lead role that year. Foster was much better in THE ACCUSED than she was here. Her first Oscar was more deserving than this one.

reply

[–] energy2429 17 years ago

Really, what did Jodie Foster do that was so deserving of a Best Actress statuette? Bette sang, danced, made me laugh, cry... everything rolled into one. Bette deserved it, hands down.

reply

[–] Flagler_88 16 years ago

When was the last time an actress won an Academy Award for a movie that had comedic elements in it. I think this movie was considered more a comedy by the Academy and those movies don't win anymore.

This is why I don't take much notice of the Oscars, how can you compare these five woman in completely different roles and decide who is better, even if they played the same role each has a different style, some would say one was perfection others would say they were crap, that is why awards don't work.

Bette may not have won the Oscar but it doesn't make her performance any less stellar.

reply

[–] denakcooper 19 years ago

Well, Jodi Foster was incredible. But Bette was too. I'm glad I didn't have to vote, because it would have been a hard choice.

I have always been a Bette fan, but after hearing her sing in this movie, WOW! This is a woman whose voice is ideal for swing! She just floored me with her talent.

DenaC

reply

[–] Spoogefest 19 years ago

I just saw this movie on dvd. And I have to say I loved, loved, loved it. I am a fan of Bette Midlers, but she outdid herself. How this movie has such a low rating on IMDb is beyond me.

"There are two things you should know about me: I'm very rich~~and I'm very wealthy." BlackWidow

reply

[–] jacob_sigo 16 years ago

I couldn't agree more.

reply

[–] hildy-1 19 years ago

The fact is that Bette is such the consummate performer, she should win everytime she performs. She's that good.

reply

[–] Isaac5855 18 years ago

Bette definitely delivered an Oscar-worthy performance in this film and she deserved her nomination, and in another year, she might have won. Jodie Foster was pretty much a deadlock that year for SILENCE OF THE LAMBS. If it had been up to me, Best Actress that year would have gone to Susan Sarandon for THELMA AND LOUISE, but that's just me. But I digress. FOR THE BOYS was definitely one of Bette's best performances and I'm glad the Academy recognized her with the nomination.

reply

[–] 18 years ago

[deleted]

[–] avario 18 years ago

Yes, indeed.

reply

[–] Foxbarking 18 years ago

This was one of the years the Oscar went to the right actress. Jodie Foster's perfomance was the best of the year.

reply

[–] Prom_Queen_Carrie 16 years ago

no way Jodie Foster in Silence of hte Lambs is my favorite female performance ever. It was by far the best female performance that year. The Academy was smart to let Silence of the Lambs sweep all major categories. It's brilliantly subtle that's why some of you don't realize how great it is. She is pitch perfect and so compelling and it was nice to see her win instead of the typical big flashy melodramatic Oscar bait roles. She was the easy winner that year. Susan Sarandon and Geena Davis were good but not Oscar worthy. No way did Bette (who cares if she sang it's about rewarding the best acting) deserve to win over Clarice Starling. Jodie in Silence of the Lambs is always ranked among the best female performances ever. I never see Bette in For the Boys on that list.

reply

[–] Jockie_Rockie 16 years ago

Jodie Foster for Silence of the Lamb was the best.

reply

[–] dinasztie13 15 years ago

Absolutely, Jodie Foster was the best that year. She may not have sung any songs, but her performance was so deep and emotional. I join the vast majority who thinks Foster deserved it. I might be biased because I really love Foster, but don't care about Midler.

reply

[–] PrivateVasquez 15 years ago

I think Everyone nominated that year were awesome in their respective roles. However, Bette made me feel the most emotions.... Laughter, tears, and inspiration. She was amazing!

"Carol Anne, go into the light"!

reply

[–] MariaLoathesDTWig 14 years ago

Jodie rightfully won.

[SPOILERS]The entire Horror genre was destroyed by sequels[/SPOILERS]

reply

[–] sirjeremy 11 years ago

I'm a Bette fan from way back but no, she shouldn't have won for this. She's a rarely subtle actress in films most of the time and wasn't suited for Dixie, at least not for the dramatic scenes. I think Susan Sarandon should have won and probably would have done if Geena Davis hadn't have been up with her.

reply