Can you think of other examples of where the wrong timing hurt a nominee's chances of winning? Join us for weekly Oscar videos and fun daily polls: ru-vid.com... @oscarman42
What an outstanding video and so interesting and provocative! I agree with Fritz that Davis and Laurie's performances are not of the Academy's taste generally, nor mine, but otherwise I agree with your judgements as regards who might have won. Who should have won is probably even more interesting and in any year Angela Lansbury and Patty McCormack should have won Best Supporting Actress. Absolute powerhouses in their respective films! Isnt the clip of Lansbury prophetic about our present dark authoritarian politics? And finally, how gracious is Liza to the wonderful Diana Ross, when Liza's performance should have won in that year and almost any other !
Thank you! I've thought about these performances for a long time and finally put them together here. I'm happy you enjoyed it....it's fun to think "what if?" with the Oscars, especially with performances that deserved to win and came so close to doing so!
What is it about those two performances that aren't of 'your taste?' These are two of the most iconic performances in film history and both highly deserving of the Oscar. The horror genre is just as deserving of awards as any other genre of film. And I would consider McCormack's performance to be comparable to Davis' and Laurie's.
Claudette Colbert gave 4 wonderful performances in 1934; however, Bette Davis still deserved to win for Of Human Bondage, even though she even wasn't officially nominated. And also Bette deserved to win in 1940 for The Letter over Ginger Rogers for Kitty Foyle (her dullest, corniest movie/performance ever). Piper Laurie in Carrie was incredibly good and way ahead of her time. She definitely should have won that year (or any other year). Same regarding Patty McCormack in The Bad Seed. Another child, Bonita Granville in These Three (1936) also comes to mind. She was superb, totally ferocious in it. In more recent times, early '90s, the brazilian Fernanda Montenegro deserved to win over the super-bland and forgettable Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love.
I have a bias towards Angela Lansbury and that performance in particular. I don't care what year or who she was up against, she deserved to win. That is my favorite female performance ever. I love it and her. Bette Davis for Baby Jane, that was a wrong year one for me. Miracle Worker, you're just taking out actresses left and right. Oh little Bad Seed, she def would have won next year. Next year did not have a good line up. Ross, I think she would have had a better chance the next year, but I think she was very good. I'm not writing it down in books as one of the greats though.
@@oscarman42My favorite male performance was not nominated for any major US award. The film won for Best foreign and the performance was nominated/won awards abroad but nada in the US. Non-English films can be a harder sell to awards committees.
I think Davis (All About Eve) & Gloria Swanson (Sunset Boulevard) canceled each other out in the Oscar race. Both were legends at that point. It's possible that either of them could have beaten Vivien Leigh in A Streetcar Names Desire the following year. Possible, but maybe not probable.
I completely agree! Most think that Davis and Baxter canceled each other out, but I believe Swanson was Davis' biggest competition. However, I don't think either would have prevailed over Leigh's towering performance. Can you imagine those 3 performance competing in the same year?
@@oscarman42Yes. I read that if Anne Baxter would have taken the supporting actress nom Bette Davis would have had a better chance. They had ties in the past. It would have been great if Davis could have tied for All about Eve and/or Baby Jane.
Bette Davis once said that she wasn't contracted to 20th century Fox (of whichever company "Eve" was made from) and Baxter was, they kept pushing for Baxter to get it over Davis for that reason.
Jane Fonda would have won in 1971 and 1972, had ‘Horses’ came out a year later. Diana Ross would have won in 1974. Btw, did you do a video on Best Actress nominees who would have won in supporting? Cicely Tyson, Valerie Perrine, and Talia Shire come to mind for that decade.
I would have no problem of Jane Fonda winning for THEY SHOOT HORSES, DON'T THEY? Can you imagine had she won for 1969, she and John Wayne might have posed together for photos. Okay, I cannot imagine that happening
@@oscarman42 I also feel there was a desire to reward her for NOT winning for Lead the same year she won for Supporting. But, yes...that year (Blue Sky) wasn't strong.
Mary Tyler Moore was EXTRAORDINARY in Ordinary People. I think she should've won over Sissy Spacek in Coal Miner's Daughter. But I definitely think that she wins if she's nominated the next year (1981)
At the 77th Academy Awards, both Annette Bening (Being Julia) and Kate Winslet (Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind) lost to Hilary Swank (Million Dollar Baby). I think there's a good chance that one or both of them would have beaten Reese Witherspoon (Walk the Line) the following year.
While I liked Witherspoon's performance, she did win in a very weak year (and it's been argued that hers was a supporting role). Interesting suggestion!
Carey mulligan also can win for promising young woman if she nominated next year and she can beat jessica chastain because the year of Jessica Chastain won the best actress is the weak year for actress.
I tink I've to dispel this myth. She wld luv us to believe it but back in 1962/63, Bette Davis is definitely NOT a frontrunner. The sentiment then was tt her nom IS her reward, esp since her Baby Jane costar was famously snubbed. The frontrunners tt season r Bancroft n Page
Love this idea! Angela Lansbury: Yes, I suppose she would have won one year later Angela Bassett: Yes, would also have won Piper Laurie: No. Not the kind of movie the Academy usually gives Acting Oscars for and Vanessa Redgrave was very respected and very overdue Bette Davis: We love to think she would win but like with Piper, this is not the kind of performance that usually wins an Oscar, espeically not at the time. And the acclaim and sentiment for Patricia Neal was too strong, she still would have won Patty McCormack: Mmh, no idea. I think Eileen Heckart was more praised for the movie. I think Umeki would still win Diana Ross: Very difficult to say because Glenda Jackson was so respected at the time. Don't have an answer here
Thank you! I always appreciate your wonderful commentary. As for Davis, my thought that is if Neal had been (rightfully IMO) placed in Supporting, then Davis would have prevailed. I understand your thoughts about Laurie and Carrie, but it makes for an interesting idea. 🙂
Well Ellen was too. IMO Glenda won cause all the rest were heavy drama and they cancelled each other out. Glenda's comedic performance stood out. I think Diana could've won in 72 over Fonda. @@sweetbutterbaby
@@robfuzz Yeah, but Ellen wasn’t gonna win BA for a horror film back then, although deserving (see ‘Baby Jane’). This is the same category where Mia Farrow was snubbed a few years before for Rosemary’s Baby. Supporting was fair game though, hence why Ruth Gordon won and Linda Blair almost did. Agnes Moorehead too in ‘65.
I know that I am going to get flamed for this and I am sorry but ... the perfornances of Bette Davis in ALL ABOUT EVE and WHATEVER HAPPENED TO BABY JANE are inspiration to drag performers everywhere
Any of the actresses who lost to Elizabeth Taylor (Butterfield-8) in 1960 over Sophia Loren in 1960's TWO WOMEN. Ida Kaminska for THE SHOP ON MAIN STREET over Katharine Hepburn in GUESS WHO'S COMING TO DINNER (1967)
@@oscarman42 I will admit that it has been years since I watched TWO WOMEN. I cannot remember if what I watched was dubbed or subtitled. Since I cannot remember much about seeing the film, I doubt that Sophia Loren left much of an impression on me.
My alternate reality Oscar wish would be that BOTH Davis and Crawford were nominated for “Baby Jane”, and then have it be a tie so they had to go up together. Might have taken Davis down a notch, since she has been so vocal about how she was an “actress” and Crawford was only a “star”. Of course, Jane was the showier role, but Crawford was also excellent in her role. 🙂
Your choices (except, in my opinion, Bette Davis) are excellent. Angela Lansbury may be the most deserving nominee who didn't win -- but even I would have voted for Patty Duke that year. I've said this elsewhere: Apparently Bette Davis was the only person who believed she deserved an Oscar for her hammy performance in "Baby Jane." She won no other awards, and I think she's embarrassing.
Thank you! Many have echoed your thoughts on Lansbury (too bad she wasn't nominated the following year - she would have easily won). Baby Jane has its admirers and detractors, to be sure.
Great list. Many of my favorites -- Annie Hall and Mrs. Miniver, especially -- are at the bottom, and I'm probably the only one who thinks that the Best Actor race for 1954 was more compelling than Best Actress. Brando, Crosby, and Mason should've stolen the headlines from Garland and Kelly.
I think so too! For me, it's one of the most deserving performances that didn't win, and she had such a promising film career ahead of her which sadly never materialized.
@@oscarman42 "Mahogany" has four noms .. Ross, Perkins, Beah Richards, Nina Foch.. just some trivia on a lonely Saturday. I read somewhere that "The Bodyguard" was originally intended for Diana and Ryan O'Neal..
@@Nicovertime Glad you are spending some time with us! You are correct about The Bodyguard - O'Neal wanted to do it, but Ross didn't like the script. More trivia? Ross appeared in only 3 films, but each one received at least one Oscar nomination.
@@oscarman42 I don't understand how Glenda Jackson beat Ellen Burstyn, as I think the latter's work in The Exorcist is one of the best performances of all time. We'll never know if Ross would have taken votes from Jackson, Burstyn, Marsha Mason, or even how the nominations would have been affected.
@@davedavis8786 Jackson's win was, to me, one of the biggest upsets of all time in that category. It came out of nowhere, though I thought she was very good.
I am not sure if this would have happened to due the problems on the set and her reputation, but Judy Garland for A STAR IS BORN over Anna Magnani for THE ROSE TATOO (the Magnani film bored me to the point that I don't see the big deal about Anna Magnani; I liked the performance of the recently deceased Marisa Pavan in the film better)
Yeah...if Garland couldn't win against Grace Kelly, I think it's doubtful she could have won against either Magnani or Hayward (the latter my choice that year). Garland does appear in my end-of-the-year tribute to all of you next week!
Lansbury would have won,Bassett should win but Lange is Lange,Redgrave still wins,Davis easily wins,hard to say as i've not seen either film,still Glenda.
Actually, what happened was Gordy took out a ridiculous amount of ads in the trade papers that made it look like he was trying to buy Ross the award which, as you stated, turned off Academy members.
I have studied the Oscars for years. My predictions are rarely wrong. I am STILL torn between Bette Davis and Gloria Swanson, the winner of course, shouldn’t have won. Period. The politics of dancing! This could have been a justifiable year for a tie in Best Actress, instead of the UN-justifiable tie for Best Actress between Katharine Hepburn in “The Lion in Winter” and Barbra Streisand for ANY movie she was in. That only happened because of the President of the Academy, who was at that time Gregory Peck. The rule was that you could not be nominated for an Acting Oscar for your film debut. The second nomination?… ok. He changed it to include film debuts because he felt that the Academy was loosing the younger population of viewers. It always seemed that old Hollywood would always win. In this case, it should have. Hepburn ate that role, spit it back at you and made you love her for it. Barbara was good in her role, but no way could/should she have won between the two. Barbra was in a movie… Kate was in a film.
@@oscarman42 I can’t say that would have been the case had the rule not change. Barbra would not have been nominated, so Kate would have won it hands down. But the change did what Peck wanted, to bring in the younger generation into the conversation. On that he was successful.
Diana Ross in Lady Sing The Blues gives one of the best performances of the decade,she could have won any year and should have won over Liza,agree with Angela,Patty McCormack i really wish she had won in 1958 but i can't deny that Dorothy Malone was the best but yes she may have won Miyoshi Umeki,Bette Davis deserved the award over Anne Bancroft and Patricia Neal all the way
2012 was also a big year with amazing performances. Meryl Streep who won, Michelle Williams with her amazing performance as Marilyn Monroe, the great Glenn Close with another nomination without an award Viola Davis for The Help and my favourite, Rooney Mara for her dark and amazing performance on The Girl With The Dragon Tattoo. What a year.
@@oscarman42 I can't tell you who people thought back then was more deserving because I was only 12, but now that I've seen almost all movies I think It was a really really good year.
Glenn Close was right on the money when she said that the Oscar doesn't go to the best but rather to the one whose campaign peaks at the right time. I think that's true or at least has been during Close's career. Her argument wasn't over one of her losses, but over Fernanda Montenegro's for "Central Station."
@@kitkeller5831 I totally agree with you. 1998 was one of the biggest robberies in oscars history. That award should've been for Fernanda Montenegro or Cate Blanchett. And the movie for Saving Private Ryan. You're totally correct, the oscars are more marketing than really deserving awards.
Great idea! Actresses I think could’ve won if they had been nominated the following year. Glenn Close - Fatal Attraction. Lost to Cher for Moonstruck but could’ve probably won over Jodie Foster for The Accused. Geena Davis/Susan Sarandon - Thelma & Louise. Lost to Jodie Foster for Silence of The Lambs but either probably could’ve won over Emma Thompson for Howard’s End. Lorraine Bracco - GoodFellas lost to Whoopi Goldberg for Ghost. Easily wins over Mercedes Ruehl for The Fisher King. Uma Thurman - Pulp Fiction lost to Dianne West for Bullets over Broadway. Probably could’ve won over Mira Sorvino for Mighty Aphrodite.
Agree with Lansbury, not sure that Bassett or Piper Laurie would've won (espcially over Vanessa in Julia), Bette would've won as would McCormack and Ross for Lady Sings the Blues.
Other ones, the only ones coming to mind are Barbara Stanwyck for Double Indemnity would have been an easy win except for it was up against Ingrid Bergman in Gaslight and you can't beat that. The other is Glenn Close for Dangerous Liaisons for Jodie Foster for The Accused. I prefer Glenn Close but if you've got the pinball machine, yeah that's gonna win the awards.
Amazing episode and I think you're right on all counts. I think Ellen Burstyn would've won for Requiem for a Dream over Halle Berry in 2002, but in hindsight, she shouldn't have lost to Julia Roberts in 2001.
Though it would've been awesome for Patty McCormack to win, Dorothy Malone was simply remarkable in Written on the wind. I wish Patty's scenario would've been like you suggested. Just Gloria Swanson was missing here.
I, too, love Malone's performance, in one of the most unlikely films to win an Oscar. Swanson was robbed, though I don't think she could have won against Leigh's iconic performance.
Swanson was seriously robbed. And I confess I rewatch Written on the wind once in a while just to see Malone's performance. Thanks for the videos! @@oscarman42
Good afternoon all Liza Minelli for THE STERILE CUCKOO over Glenda Jackson (for WOMEN IN LOVE). Glenn Close for ALBERT NOBBS over Jennifer Lawrence for SILVER LININGS PLAYBOOK. I like Miyoshi Umeck's performance in SAYONARA, but Mercedes McCormick for GIANT or Eileen Heckart for BAD SEED would have won; McCormack is good, in BAD SEED but Heckart is better For those celebrating Christmas, I wish you a happy but safe holiday (so we can all get together next week and next year). One of the best things about 2023 for me was finding this site and making a lot of new friends; my Saturdays wouldn't be the same without all of you. I know that I have never said it enough, but thank you Oscarman42 for moderating the discussions
I am delighted that you discovered this channel. Your participation is always engaging, and your knowledge of both films and the Oscars is both enjoyable and entertaining. We don't always agree, but I look forward to reading more of your from you in the coming year. Wishing you a happy and healthy Xmas.
I would say Bette Davis for Dark Victory over Ginger Rogers in 1940 although she still had competition. Basset I feel should have won over Hunter. I would like to believe she could have won the following year. The same for Ross . Interesting neither Ross or Minnelli had big film careers after. Liza won for her absolute one role that fit her so perfectly. Landsbury ? Yes likely she would have. I think Elsa Lanchester might have won. Anne Bancroft had a big advantage over Davis I don’t know if it was shocking she won . It’s the kind of role the academy likes and she had been doing it on stage . Not really a fan of Baby Jane but a number of times I think Davis could have had that third one.
I think Davis could have prevailed over Rogers (a win I don't get). Yes, Ross and Minnelli were unable to build on their respective performances despite great momentum.
Just for the lineup as it was for 1940 Rogers still ranks no higher than fourth maybe fifth. Fontaine, Davis and Hepburn were top three. I go back and forth on how I would rank them. I think there are oddly a lot of good Oscar wins for the 1970’s even though it’s not the most actress friendly decade Male characters are really dominating at that point. Minnelli had the charisma of a lead actress but the quirkiness of a supporting one . Ross obviously had the acting chops sometimes they don’t take singers seriously in acting. Then there is the issue Viola Davis has remarked that there are fewer roles for women of color and back then I think Ross would have needed more opportunities to show she could do more .
Angela Bassett is a fantastic actress, and her performance deserved many awards. Bette Davis gave an appallingly overblown performance in the vastly over-rated "Baby Jane'. To think that either she or Crawford thought they were even in the running to contend with both Patty Duke and Anne Bancroft in a far superior movie is absurd.
@@oscarman42: You obviously love those performances when actresses engage in appallingly over-the top histrionics. "Baby Jane" was and was intended to be a freak show. It's so sad that Davis herself so desperately wanted the award for "Baby Jane." "Baby Jane" was beneath both her and Crawford. Davis' best films are "Dark Victory" and "All About Eve." Baby Jane is appalling.
I agree with these selections especially Diana Ross who would easily have won the 1973 Best Actress Oscar over Glenda Jackson in A Touch of Class. It is also likely that, with an Oscar, Ross would have enjoyed a more productive film career than the one she had. It ended too soon with The Wiz in 1978 & should have included The Josephine Baker Story & The Bodyguard.
She was supposed to do a film entitled "Silence," playing a deaf-mute prostitute (co-starring Jack Lemmon). She would have been great in this - what a shame it was never produced.
@@oscarman42 I never knew that but I have a list somewhere of possible film projects post-LSTB starring Diana Ross. One of them was a musical remake of Breakfast at Tiffany's, another a screen version of the Richard Rodgers Broadway hit No Strings which had won Diahann Carroll the Tony. Did you know that Diana was nominated for the BAFTA (British Academy Award) in 1973 for LSTB? She was nominated alongside Glenda Jackson (A Touch of Class), Julie Christie (Don't Look Now) & Stephane Audran (2 French films). I remember watching this on TV & when the nominations were read out they showed film clips of each actress. Diana received a loud ovation & applause from the star-studded audience but the expected win didn't happen. There was a stony silence when Stephane Audran's name was read out as the winner. Note: LSTB was released in the UK in 1973 hence Diana nominated the year after her Oscar nomination. However, Diana DID win the Photoplay film magazine Best Actress award, a UK magazine, voted by readers.
Andrews won in 1965 (I listed the years of the awards, not when the films were released). However, had they been in the same year, then no, I don't think Davis would have prevailed.
