Worst Best Supporting Actress Winner

Worst Best Supporting Actress Winner

Mo'Nique, Precious: Based on the Novel Push by Sapphire
0
No votes
Penelope Cruz, Vicky Cristina Barcelona
3
8%
Tilda Swinton, Michael Clayton
1
3%
Jennifer Hudson, Dreamgirls
3
8%
Rachel Weisz, The Constant Gardener
3
8%
Cate Blanchett, The Aviator
1
3%
Renee Zellweger, Cold Mountain
18
46%
Catherine Zeta-Jones, Chicago
4
10%
Jennifer Connelly, A Beautiful Mind
6
15%
Marcia Gay Harden, Pollock
0
No votes
 
Total votes: 39

Hustler
Tenured
Posts: 2914
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:35 pm
Location: Buenos Aires-Argentina

Post by Hustler »

Zellweger and Connelly were totally undeserved. Zellwegger is the worst.
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10055
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Post by Reza »

Big Magilla wrote:
Reza wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:I thought we years ago forgave Connelly for her "lifeless acceptance speech" caused by then boyfriend Josh Charles dumping her on the way to the Oscars.
I had no idea about her being dumped on Oscar night.

Anyway she is an actress and was an Oscar winner that night. She should have 'performed' the speech. NOT forgiven.
I agree with Greg that the acceptance speech shouldn't have anything to do with whether the performance deserved the award but if we're going to count acceptance speeches as part of our criteria, none was ever worse than the mechanical ones Zellweger gave all throughout awards season as if by rote. So a double whammy to Zellweger from me.
Sometimes a weak or lousy winning performance followed by a dazzling acceptance speech shows up the actor (overall) in a positive light. But ofcourse you are right performances are being judged here and speeches at a later date have absolutely no bearing on the performance itself.

I just felt Connelley's win was a head scratcher to me and it was followed by that speech where she just read off a piece of paper without even looking at the audience. Maybe she WAS devastated at being dumped by a boy friend on Oscar night and she just wanted to wrap things up and leave............although, I think, she was photographed later at a number of Oscar parties following the award ceremony.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19336
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

Reza wrote:
Big Magilla wrote:I thought we years ago forgave Connelly for her "lifeless acceptance speech" caused by then boyfriend Josh Charles dumping her on the way to the Oscars.
I had no idea about her being dumped on Oscar night.

Anyway she is an actress and was an Oscar winner that night. She should have 'performed' the speech. NOT forgiven.
I agree with Greg that the acceptance speech shouldn't have anything to do with whether the performance deserved the award but if we're going to count acceptance speeches as part of our criteria, none was ever worse than the mechanical ones Zellweger gave all throughout awards season as if by rote. So a double whammy to Zellweger from me.
FilmFan720
Emeritus
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Post by FilmFan720 »

The Original BJ wrote:Torn between Connelly and Zellweger. The former appears in a much worse movie, and has much less of a part. She might as well be in a coma, whereas at least Zellweger is doing SOMETHING.

On the other hand, Zellweger does a lot more to actively sabotage her film. She practically appears to have ridden in from another movie entirely.

Today, I chose the severely miscalculated performance over the completely boring one and picked Zellweger.
It has been many years since I sat through Cold Mountain, so I am talking based on vague recollections, but I think the argument could be made that Renee Zellwegger is not the one sabotaging the film. The entire story seems to be asking for a Greek tragedy style, as the entire story is completely over the top. Zellwegger seems to be the only one reaching for the stars in this film (as well as some of the smaller supporting actors). Maybe it is the underacting of Jude Law and Nicole Kidman that is sabotaging the film...had everyone been making the same choices as Zellwegger the film would have at least been more fun to watch.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
The Original BJ
Emeritus
Posts: 4312
Joined: Mon Apr 28, 2003 8:49 pm

Post by The Original BJ »

Torn between Connelly and Zellweger. The former appears in a much worse movie, and has much less of a part. She might as well be in a coma, whereas at least Zellweger is doing SOMETHING.

On the other hand, Zellweger does a lot more to actively sabotage her film. She practically appears to have ridden in from another movie entirely.

Today, I chose the severely miscalculated performance over the completely boring one and picked Zellweger.
Greg
Tenured
Posts: 3292
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 1:12 pm
Location: Greg
Contact:

Post by Greg »

I fail to see how an acceptance speech has any bearing on whether or not the performance deserved an award.
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10055
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Post by Reza »

Big Magilla wrote:I thought we years ago forgave Connelly for her "lifeless acceptance speech" caused by then boyfriend Josh Charles dumping her on the way to the Oscars.
I had no idea about her being dumped on Oscar night.

Anyway she is an actress and was an Oscar winner that night. She should have 'performed' the speech. NOT forgiven.
FilmFan720
Emeritus
Posts: 3650
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 3:57 pm
Location: Illinois

Post by FilmFan720 »

Mister Tee wrote:A pretty thin bunch.

I voted for Zeta-Jones, partly because she impressed me not at all, but also because of the unfathomable level of praise she received from some critics. I thought she was strictly one-note.

I might have voted for Zellweger as well, but I figured she'd find plenty of support elsewhere.
At least Zellwegger was trying (albeit also failing) to do something interesting. I will always give points to actors who make big choices that don't work out (and you must admit that character is full of big choices, and alot of verve) versus performances that come across lifeless and passionless. Zeta-Jones makes no interesting choices and brings nothing to a role that demands presence and passion. She got my vote.
"Go into the world and do well. But more importantly, go into the world and do good."
- Minor Myers, Jr.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19336
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

I thought we years ago forgave Connelly for her "lifeless acceptance speech" caused by then boyfriend Josh Charles dumping her on the way to the Oscars.
Reza
Laureate Emeritus
Posts: 10055
Joined: Thu Jan 02, 2003 11:14 am
Location: Islamabad, Pakistan

Post by Reza »

Connelley.......lifeless performance and an equally lifeless acceptance speech.
Mister Tee
Tenured Laureate
Posts: 8648
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 2:57 pm
Location: NYC
Contact:

Post by Mister Tee »

A pretty thin bunch.

I voted for Zeta-Jones, partly because she impressed me not at all, but also because of the unfathomable level of praise she received from some critics. I thought she was strictly one-note.

I might have voted for Zellweger as well, but I figured she'd find plenty of support elsewhere.
Damien
Laureate
Posts: 6331
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 8:43 pm
Location: New York, New York
Contact:

Post by Damien »

Cate Blanchett. A wan impersonation.
"Y'know, that's one of the things I like about Mitt Romney. He's been consistent since he changed his mind." -- Christine O'Donnell
dws1982
Emeritus
Posts: 3794
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 9:28 pm
Location: AL
Contact:

Post by dws1982 »

I can see why people will gravitate towards Connelly, Zeta-Jones, and Zellweger. Connelley's performance is fairly dull and lifeless; Zeta-Jones's performance was serviceable I guess, but it's soulless and it's clear that the editor cut around her graceless dancing which still made her look like some drunk college girl. Zellweger's performance is broad and way over-the-top, but she's kind of entertaining and you can look at her as playing a character who's playing a character.

I'm not a huge fan of them, but I can see how people would be fans of these performances or at least why the actresses won. So I'll vote for Penelope Cruz. Hers is the one win this decade that just doesn't make any sense. I don't have a clue what people saw in this performance.
Big Magilla
Site Admin
Posts: 19336
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 3:22 pm
Location: Jersey Shore

Post by Big Magilla »

I tossed a coin and voted for Zellweger, but Cruz was even more wretched.

I don't get the hate for Connelly. She was unmemorable but not grating like those two.
User avatar
Eric
Tenured
Posts: 2749
Joined: Wed Jan 01, 2003 11:18 pm
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota
Contact:

Post by Eric »

Most of these performances don't do much for me. My latent StinkyLulu tendencies were sorely disappointed this decade.

Throwing my vote toward Weisz simply because I haven't actually seen Connelly's allegedly paint-primer performance.
Post Reply

Return to “81st and Other 9th Decade Discussions”