MovieChat Forums > Ulee's Gold (1997) Discussion > should have won Best actor!!!

should have won Best actor!!!


dont get me wrong i love Jack Nicholson and i liked As Good As It Gets...but i just dont think he should have won for it{he can do this sort of thing in his sleep! or are were just used to him being good?}, it should have been Fonda's year he is just great as Ulee. his best for me is still The Hired Hand...i just love that film

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Amen. I was really upset he didn't win (though Jack's no slouch).

heath

reply

I don't understand why Nicholson shouldn't win an Oscar because "he can do this sort of thing in his sleep!". The Award is for the quality of the performance, not the effort it took to create the role. I was as excited to see Fonda nominated as anyone, but now that I've seen the movie, I don't know whether his performance was so much better than Nicholson's as to say that Fonda deserved the Oscar. At times, Fonda appears quite wooden. He did a great job portraying the back-breaking work that occupies the days of bee-keepers, but in the first part of the movie his character did not come off as original or engaged in any emotion with the other characters. Not saying that it wasn't a good performance. Had I been given a ballot, I most likely would have cast it for Robert Duvall.

I do remember that, in his acceptance speech, Nicholson acknowledged that his victory was bittersweet because he was close friends with many of his co-nominees; surely the closest among them was Fonda.

There's something different about you today, Mr. Laurio.

reply

"...but now that I've seen the movie, I don't know whether his performance was so much better than Nicholson's as to say that Fonda deserved the Oscar. At times, Fonda appears quite wooden. He did a great job portraying the back-breaking work that occupies the days of bee-keepers, but in the first part of the movie his character did not come off as original or engaged in any emotion with the other characters. Not saying that it wasn't a good performance. " - Cue-ball

Well said.

I like Fonda, probably just for sentimental reasons and because I think that Peter Fonda does bring a certain indefinable (at least I won't try) "magic"; chemistry to the screen.

I like this movie, but I think most of the other actors on set did a better job with the craft than PF (I know that fellow Peter Fonda fans will probably hate me for that, but that's my opinion).

I suspect if the director had made more effort, he could have drawn a better performance out of Fonda, but maybe this was out of the question for the director to even consider - "how dare he?"; maybe he was intimidated? I think a lot great performances are lost because a director does not or can not cross that line. I usually blame the director.

reply

[deleted]

Fonda for best actor? He was the same emotionless zombie throughout the entire film! Anybody coulda played that part!

My vote history link:http://imdb.com/mymovies/list?l=5504773

reply

I thought he bore an uncanny resemblance to Clint Eastwood in this flick, with the stoic, deadpan delivery, but he was a pale comparison indeed.

I think the story needed more meat, for me to care about Ulee. A bit more back story, perhaps.

“I always tell the truth…even when I lie” - Scarface

reply

Sorry for the late post, but I totally agree. J.N. does his roles in his sleep. Peter Fonda really made Ulee's Gold his own film. Definite snub by the academy.

reply

1997 truly was the year of the snubs Best Picture, Best Actor, Best Actress, Best Supporting Actor and Best Director where all given to the less deserving.

And remember, my friends, future events such as these will affect you in the future.

reply

Fonda, Dench, Reynolds, and Cusack for the acting wins that year.

reply

[deleted]

I personally liked Nicholson more. The Oscar's Best Actor category did not have my personal favourite performances of the year, so I was not super happy that Nicholson won or super upset that Fonda lost. If Nicholson did not win, I would have loved for Fonda to be the recipient.

reply