Best Actress 1962

[Eric]

The only reason I gave my 1981 award to Faye Dunaway for Mommie Dearest is because I didn't want to give a sixth award to Hepburn but on the days when she loses to Woodward in 1968 I take the 1981 award away from Dunaway in order to keep Hepburn's record over Ingrid Bergman and Jack Nicholson who have four each.

And what do you have for breakfast on those days?

[Uri]

On my last count, there were 25 books about Katharine Hepburn in my library. Finding a 1952 Time magazine with her on the cover (for Pat and Mike) in a San Francisco store was a highlight in my first visit there. And I think I earn my credentials as her fan here as well. Anyway, I love the idea of Hepburn being nominated over almost half a century, longer then any other actor. Yet – looking at it objectively, her nomination (and certainly her win) for On Golden Pond was, how shell I put it, a charitable one. Over the years I tried my best to be self convinced it was worthy, but just like her turn in Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, it was a serviceable performance, effectively milking the admiration so many have (your truly included) to her public persona. In both cases she really shouldn’t have been nominated (and the fact that in both cases her character was basically functioning as the goody-goody sidekick of the male protagonist didn't help either).

On my all comers list she's the winner in '35, '55 and '62. I'm going with Garbo for '33, Russell or Sullivan in '40, Evens in '67 and Woodward in '68. As for '81 – probably Keaton.



Edited By Uri on 1252170316

[Big Magilla]

On the other hand while I was dismayed at Hepburn's win for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, I recall justifying it to friends at the time by saying she should have had four or five by then.

Yes, five seems like a lot and it would be if she were winning them for playing pretty much the same part over and over but she wasn't. Five, though, is my limit.

I gave her my Oscar Shouldabeens for Little Women, The Philadelphia Story, Summertime, Long Day's Journey Into Night and depending on the day, either The Lion in Winter or On Golden Pond.

I go back and forth between the latter two because although The Lion in Winter is the better film with the stronger Hepburn performance, there are days when I think Joanne Woodward should have won that year for Rachel, Rachel.

The only reason I gave my 1981 award to Faye Dunaway for Mommie Dearest is because I didn't want to give a sixth award to Hepburn but on the days when she loses to Woodward in 1968 I take the 1981 award away from Dunaway in order to keep Hepburn's record over Ingrid Bergman and Jack Nicholson who have four each.

[Okri]

No problem. I have to admit the contributing to a fifth Hepburn victory (it's a lot, isn't it) in just over half the time than it took her to win four also weighed on my mind.

[ITALIANO]

Thank you Okri.

[Okri]

I voted for Bancroft to counteract Italiano's mistaken vote. And now she's winning. Hepburn would've been my number one, barely edging out Page. Barely. But Bancroft is worthy - indeed, four of these actresses are amazing, and there's no denying that Davis is memorable.

[flipp525]

I've seen three adaptations of The Glass Menagerie since then, and I can't help judging the lead actresses against Field. None of them have come close (although Joanne Woodward was legitimately good), by my calculations. And Field's performance, like Laurie's, is one that not many people around today can claim to have seen, since it only played for a few weeks at the Kennedy Center in the Summer of 2004. (I think flipp has said a few times here that he saw it, and very much admired it.)

You're right, dws, I did see Sally Field in The Glass Menagerie in the summer of '04 (along with Patricia Clarkson in Streetcar and Mary Stuart Masterson in Cat, both of whom certainly did NOT give definitive performances of their respective Williams female tragi-heroines).

You are spot-on in your description of Field's interpretation of Amanda Wingfield. It was, quite simply, a stunning creation. Even though Menagerie is fundamentally a sentimental play, her performance was just so fiercely in the present. Field's Amanda knew that the foundation of her world was on the thinnest of ice and even at her most delusional, she allowed the audience such clear glimpses into her darkest realizations. If it had been a Broadway production, she would've been a clear Tony frontrunner. It was the best of the trilogy of Tennessee Williams plays that played that summer and most of that was due to Field's fantastic performance (although, the lighting and set design were equally superb).

And though I really do admire the 1987 version as well as Joanne Woodward impressive performance, the haunting Henry Mancini score and Karen Allen's beautiful work both stand out the most.

By the by, Cate Blanchett will be appearing in A Streetcar Named Desire at The Kennedy Center this October.



Edited By flipp525 on 1251828544

[ITALIANO]

I didnt mean to vote for Hepburn, but ok, now it's done. And, while I still hope that my vote can be changed (otherwise this will become Katharine Hepburn's Board), I must admit that the meeting between America's greatest playwright and a woman who to some is America's greatest actress (and with a director who's hated here, but who was intelligent enough to control the situation well) doesnt disappoint. Hepburn's performance is a brilliant display of talent, well served of course by a great character and a great text.

Hepburn is at her best here, and since the same can be said of the other nominees, and four of them are generally considered to be among America's finest, you understand the level of this year's competition.

The only one I would certainly NOT vote for is Davis, who's truly "iconic" and even courageous as Baby Jane, but whom I still prefer in other roles and I already voted for more than once.

As great as Lee Remick is (and she has probably the most interesting character in Days of Wine and Roses), my pick is Anne Bancroft, for her signature role and a solid, not narcissistic performance in The Miracle Worker (I know, she'd have at least another signature role a few years later, but I'm still not sure whom I'll vote for in THAT year).



Edited By ITALIANO on 1251823188

[Aceisgreat]

Went back and forth from Bancroft to Hepburn, briefly considered Davis, finally settled on Bancroft, changed my mind and voted for Hepburn.

[dws1982]

Lee Remick is superb in Days of Wine and Roses -- such a nuanced performance -- but for her to win and Jack Lemmon coming up short would be as silly as, say, if the Academy honored Reese Witherspoon in I Walk The Line but not Joaquin Phoenix.

The only reason I would even consider voting for Remick but not Lemmon was because Best Actor was so strong that year. Which of course was also the case the year that Witherspoon won and Phoenix lost.

Remick's final scene, where she finally admits to herself that her disease is stronger than she is, and that she no longer wishes to fight it, is heartbreaking just to think about, and as a result, I can't vote for anyone else. I'll probably vote for Lemmon if we do 1962, but Gregory Peck would be hard to vote against.

Big Magilla: For the record, I totally understand where you're coming from, and I've done it myself. With me, no one can convince me that Sally Field is not the definitive Amanda Wingfield. She's not an actress whose film and TV work I've been a big fan of, but that performance was one for the ages. I've seen three adaptations of The Glass Menagerie since then, and I can't help judging the lead actresses against Field. None of them have come close (although Joanne Woodward was legitimately good), by my calculations. And Field's performance, like Laurie's, is one that not many people around today can claim to have seen, since it only played for a few weeks at the Kennedy Center in the Summer of 2004. (I think flipp has said a few times here that he saw it, and very much admired it.) So I've been in the same boat, and I think it's very much possible that Piper Laurie can be excellent in the lead role in Days of Wine and Roses. I think it's possible with Amanda Wingfield as well, but so few actresses seem to get that character the way Field did. (Namely: Field did not play Wingfield as some long-lost cousin of Blanche DuBois. A lot of actress play her as some deluded old crow, and I think it's the wrong approach to the character if the play is going to make much sense.)

[Damien]

I voted for Bette Davis. I love the bravery and the gusto and the humor of her Jane Hudson, and while creating a truly terrifying (in several ways) figure, she's also very moving.

Lee Remick is superb in Days of Wine and Roses -- such a nuanced performance -- but for her to win and Jack Lemmon coming up short would be as silly as, say, if the Academy honored Reese Witherspoon in I Walk The Line but not Joaquin Phoenix,

As for the other three nominees, boiled ham, baked ham and smoked ham.

[Cinemanolis]

Actors play parts originated by other actors which in turn are later reprised by others all the time. Seldom does one actor or actress so dominate the role that all others pale in comparison - ....- and Laurie in Days of Wine and Roses. Yes, she's that good.

Ok, now you made me go to my basement and find the VHS copy of the Laurie version. I am looking forward to watching it sometime this week.

[Big Magilla]

To be honest, despite Big Magilla talking about it for years, it doesn't matter how good Piper Laurie was in the original TV version of Days of Wine and Roses. I do look forward to seeing it on DVD when it comes out, and I hope it's a good performance, but I don't have much use for "You wouldn't like X so much if you had seen Y" arguments.

Generally true, which is why I didn't use the argument when assessing Anne Bancroft's performance in The Miracle Worker vis-a-vis Teresa Wright's or Ernest Borgnine's performance in Marty vis-a-vis Rod Steiger's or any number of other examples.

Actors play parts originated by other actors which in turn are later reprised by others all the time. Seldom does one actor or actress so dominate the role that all others pale in comparison - Cagney in Yankee Doodle Dandy, Brando in A Streetcar Named Desire, Bogart in practically everything from Casablanca on - Davis in All About Eve, Swanson in Sunset Boulevard - and Laurie in Days of Wine and Roses. Yes, she's that good.

[Penelope]

I voted for Bancroft.

[dws1982]

To be honest, despite Big Magilla talking about it for years, it doesn't matter how good Piper Laurie was in the original TV version of Days of Wine and Roses. I do look forward to seeing it on DVD when it comes out, and I hope it's a good performance, but I don't have much use for "You wouldn't like X so much if you had seen Y" arguments. All of the films in this category were either remade for TV or were remakes of TV productions, and I don't think that I have to see other actresses in all of these roles to assess the performances nominated here.

A good performance stands on its own without reference to that of someone else in the same role, and Lee Remick's performance in Days of Wine and Roses is worthy of the win, by my money.

Don't have a problem with Bancroft's win; haven't seen in the Page performance. Have no strong feelings about Davis in Baby Jane (I like Hush, Hush, Sweet Charlotte better), and Tee's assessment of Hepburn is in line with mine, although he likes Long Day's Journey Into Night as a play better than I do. (I like it, but when it comes to O'Neill I prefer The Iceman Cometh and A Moon For the Misbegotten.)



Edited By dws1982 on 1251757953