Worthier Best Actress winner for 1965
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Elizabeth Hartman
Mike-957 — 12 years ago(September 25, 2013 06:59 PM)
As much as I admire the beauty and talent of Julie Christie (even in an unsavoury film such as DARLING), I believe Elizabeth Hartman should have won that year for A PATCH OF BLUE. It is an amazing debut performance. I have heard the director say that Hayley Mills was first thought of for the role. Hayley is a very good actress but I doubt that she could have personified the character of Selina as sensitively as Miss Hartman did. The whole cast of PATCH is excellent and it contains one of Jerry Goldsmith's most unusual and haunting scores. I was sad to read of her later life and suicide. I hope that even though no human was available to help her on that day that she cried out to the Lord in her moment of trial. (She was someone I was led to pray for). An under-rated actress who never received her full due.
-
don-lockwood — 11 years ago(June 01, 2014 12:45 PM)
I agree too. A Patch of Blue was a wonderful, important, and uplifting film, even being fully aware of her real-life fate. It's the kind of performance they would always nominate but never award a great character but defined by her circumstances more so than the actor's performance; also a newcomer with uncertain longevity, up against the new "It Girl." Even today, we see the same politics with Gabby Sidibe in Precious losing to Sandra Bullock, while her costar Mo'Nique won for a turn similar to Shelley Winters's in this film. It's a shame because I didn't care for Darling one bit. Even though Julie Christie has had a nice, long career, I don't think that highly of her as an actress. Her Oscar-winning role was inferior to Hartman, Andrews in The Sound of Music (considering how iconic the film and her performance in it are), and Samantha Eggar in The Collector. In fact, Eggar, like Hartman, was another newcomer in a very meaty, physically challenging role, but the Academy didn't go for her film as much as they did for Darling, and she just wasn't headed for the same degree of stardom as Christie.
Simone Signoret and the not-nominated Vivien Leigh were also terrific that year in Ship of Fools, while Catherine Deneuve was ripped off for a classic turn in Repulsion, but that's something they would never go for.
As for other performances by a lead actress in 1965: Christie of course was winning for Doctor Zhivago as much as for Darling, but I don't think there was much to her character or performance in that more memorable film. I haven't seen Anne Bancroft in The Slender Thread, but I did see Bette Davis in The Nanny, and she was her typical haunting latter-day self. Carroll Baker did a better job than expected in the obscure Sylvia, and Jane Fonda and Natalie Wood were as charming as ever in Cat Ballou and The Great Race. -
Mike-957 — 11 years ago(June 17, 2014 05:14 AM)
Great post Don. I'd have rather ANY of the other actresses nominated that year win the Oscar than Miss Christie. I admire her talents but DARLING did nothing for me.Guessing they considered her work in ZHIVAGO, a better film and- I think- a more memorable performance. Vivien Leigh should at least have been up for an award for her work as Mrs Treadwell in SHIP OF FOOLS. Samantha Eggar reportedly had a very unpleasant time under William Wyler (my favourite director of all time but apparently he could be a bully at times). I'm sure the fact that she gives a very good performance in spite of this makes me place her as my next favourite after Miss Hartman.