I think so. I thaught she did such a good job portraying this woman.
-
spartacus100773 — 19 years ago(October 25, 2006 08:32 PM)
I might be off by one year but didnt Paltrow win for Shakespeare in Love weel thats a croc .Kathy Bates was teriffic in Misery but this is the caliber of acting one would be lucky to witness once in his/her lifetime.It is just like payola on radio airwaves.
-
peterheidemann — 19 years ago(November 21, 2006 01:44 AM)
The fact that Kathy Bates didn't evet get a nomination for her portrait of Dolores Claiborne, is one of the biggest mistakes in Oscar history. Probably one of the top 10 "best performances" I have ever seen.
Also Judy Parfitt, should have been nominated. She is just briliant.
All in all, one of the best movies I've ever seen. -
meforyou — 19 years ago(December 22, 2006 08:49 PM)
I just saw in on TV. I cried again for the both amazing performances of Bates and Leigh. It's a perfect movie to me.
Kathy Bates DESERVED an Oscar for this role. She is so great here even better than Misery, in a way.
I just can't believe that she's so underrated in that award season. She deserved far better than she got here. -
Crispin_Dry — 19 years ago(January 18, 2007 06:59 AM)
Kathy Bates definitely deserved an Oscar nomination as Best Actress and so did Jennifer Jason Leigh for Best Supporting Actress. I also think Taylor Hackford's excellent direction was better than his Oscar-nominated direction of the film Ray. All around, Dolores Claiborne was an unfairly snubbed movie.
-
violinjoe — 19 years ago(March 15, 2007 12:17 AM)
This movie deserved nominations far beyond just best actress, it was one of the most incredible screenplay adaptations ever put on film..if you read the book, it's like a confession from beginning to end, and the way it was turned into a story was just remarkable.
Jennifer Jason Leigh and Judy Parfitt both deserved nods for their performances as well, and how about for cinematography? this is one of the most underappreciated, underanked movies of all time -
jackboot — 16 years ago(July 20, 2009 05:41 PM)
I second your opinion, Crispin Dry, on Taylor Hackford's direction in Delores Claiborne being miles ahead of his work on Ray. Ray was such a gratuitous and indulgent piece of garbage!! I hated it!! I lump Ray, Walk the Line and The Aviator all into the same bin as being gratuitous vehicles for the stars to show the full depth and breadth of their so-called talents, from A to about C or D.
Has Stephen King ever really gotten any respect from the Academy? Okay, Misery, yes. I'm just thinking that a lot of people like to dismiss anything that is connected with Stephen King as being L-I-T-E, populist and geared for the lowest common denominator (which is, of course, a grossly unfair and undeserved snub in itself).
A lot of people complain that the Miramax boys really knew how to work the angles - publicity, advertising, to really time a picture's buzz so that it peaks at Oscar time, which would help to explain why such a jejune and shallow actress as Gwyneth Paltrow would receive a best actress Oscar for such an inconsequential piece of pseudo-art and fluff over any number of other better performances, Kathy Bates' perhaps chief among them.
Kathy Bates is one of, if not my very favorite, actress, because she really takes on some tough parts that are not glamorous and she gives performances that are complex and full of depth in addition to being roles that would scare-off most other actresses. She's not afraid to look bad if that's what it takes to give the part what it needs. She attacks a role like a prize fighter and she usually comes out on top. I can't say enough to her credit.