Unofficial Academy Awards Discussion Board

1987 - Norma Aleandro, Anne Archer, Olympia Dukakis, Anne Ramsey, Ann Sothern

Ramsey and Sothern are deceased. Aleandro (81), Dukakis (86) and Archer (70) are still active, although Aleandro is pretty much limited to Argentina and neither Dukakis whose husband, actor Louis Zorich, died in January, nor Archer, get the kinds of roles they once did.

I just realized something unique about this particular category in this particular year: They're all first-and-only time nominees. They all got nominated for the first time and as of this writing, they all never got a second nomination. Brennan and La Gallienne have passed. Scarwid is basically retired. Moriarty and Steenburgen are still active but are mostly doing TV and are not getting the high-profile juicy roles in film.

Has it happened before or since?

Mister Tee wrote:Some great people have won Pulitzers. But so has Maureen Dowd.

And Thomas Friedman has won three.

Reza wrote:

Mister Tee wrote:I spent five years near Chicago during Ebert's pre-TV heyday -- '69 through '74 -- so he was a regular read for me. And I never found his writing terribly engaing or insightful. That he somehow rose to America's Premier Film Critic is beyond me.

Didn't he win the Pulitzer?

Yes, in fact just after I left Chicago, in '75.

Some great people have won Pulitzers. But so has Maureen Dowd.



Edited By Mister Tee on 1284050387

Reza wrote:

Mister Tee wrote:I spent five years near Chicago during Ebert's pre-TV heyday -- '69 through '74 -- so he was a regular read for me. And I never found his writing terribly engaing or insightful. That he somehow rose to America's Premier Film Critic is beyond me.

Didn't he win the Pulitzer?

Two architecture critics in the running probably cancelled each other out.



Edited By Sonic Youth on 1284050199

Reza wrote:

Mister Tee wrote:I spent five years near Chicago during Ebert's pre-TV heyday -- '69 through '74 -- so he was a regular read for me. And I never found his writing terribly engaing or insightful. That he somehow rose to America's Premier Film Critic is beyond me.

Didn't he win the Pulitzer?

I hope not.

Any time I say something against Ebert someone gets nervous. He's probably very popular in America, and I have never seen him on tv, where it's possible that he does well what he has to do. But I do read his reviews because, I admit, from those I get easily and quickly an idea of what the movie is about. The story line, I mean. But that's all one can get I think.

Mister Tee wrote:I spent five years near Chicago during Ebert's pre-TV heyday -- '69 through '74 -- so he was a regular read for me. And I never found his writing terribly engaing or insightful. That he somehow rose to America's Premier Film Critic is beyond me.

Didn't he win the Pulitzer?

Eric wrote:Want to see more of Italiano's writing from when he was 7 years old.

I didn't write in English back then. Some might say that I still don't, I know.

ITALIANO wrote:When I was 7 I was more profound.

Ah, a legend in his own mind.