I think so. I thaught she did such a good job portraying this woman.
-
sara-chan — 18 years ago(May 11, 2007 02:32 AM)
I very much agree. I watched the movie last night, for the first time. Afterwards, I checked on IMDB to see about Kathy Bates, whose performance was so extremely realistic. And then I saw that Bates did not even get NOMINATED for an Oscar??? It is often tricky to say who should have won, but surely Bates deserved a nomination.
Something strange must have happened. I would be really interested in finding out what politics, or whatever, led to the lack of nomination. -
-
dkorba — 17 years ago(June 17, 2008 08:38 PM)
I'm in total agreement. I just watched it again (for the umpteenth time) and although I've seen it often, it keeps pulling me in. This movie should have received numerous nominations: Bates, Leigh, Parfitt, Plummer and Strathairn all turned-in excellent performances. The direction, cinematography and screenplay also should have been nominated. This movie is as close to perfection as any movie I've seen. Like another poster said, I guess because of Bates' win for another Stephen King adaptation, the Oscars didn't find it plausible to nominate her. But that doesn't explain the other oversights. Whatever the politics, the numerous snubs have to be some of the biggest oversights in Oscar history.
-
Knewsense78 — 17 years ago(October 05, 2008 05:01 PM)
Agree to everything that was mentioned. What Kathy Bates did in Delores Claiborne out-topped the performance she gave in Misery. Don't get me wrong, I like Misery, this movie was just better to me. The performances, the directing, everything. Kathy Bates knocked this one right of the park. Amazing film. Maybe that explains why I own this one and not Misery.
-
dalya23 — 17 years ago(November 17, 2008 03:28 PM)
Couldn't agree more. I was simply blown away by Bates' performance here. The movie too is great..very underrated. Kathy's performance in this movie was definitely better than her performance in Misery. God knows how the hell she wasn't even nominated for an Oscar!! A major rob.
-
Nemesis7293-1 — 16 years ago(July 23, 2009 06:02 AM)
If an actor could give only one performance in their entire career and have that one performance be the entirety of their careerno actor could wish for a more perfect showcase than Kathy Bates had in "Dolores Claiborne". It is not just a great performance, not just Oscar worthy for the year in which it was given, it is truly, undoubtedly one of the single greatest performances ever given in the history of the medium. On the part of the Academy this is not just an oversight, but a criminal, purposeful SNUB. The Academy has shown that in it's later years it much prefers giving Oscars to "pretty" and "popular" people whether their performances merit it or not. Witness Gwyneth Paltrow's win this same year. What moron could look at that performance and even begin to compare it with the work that Bates does here? The deep criminality of the snub does not end with Bates. Christopher Plummer and David Straithairn are magnificent and should also have been recognized with nominations, if not the actual awards. Judy Parfitt, however, should not have even been insulted with a mere nomination.she should simply have been given the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actress OUTRIGHT!!! No one else even came close to the brilliance she displayed. I won't mention who won that year, but she should be well aware that she is the beneficiary of a scarlet theft. Not only in the acting was this film profoundly robbed, but Taylor Hackford's exquisite direction, Tony Gilroy's pitch-perfect screenplay, and Gabriel Beristain's gorgeous cinematography.as well as virtually every other person who contributed to this film.should have had AT LEAST a nomination. After this disgusting snub I have lost virtually all respect for The Academy Of Motion Picture Arts And Sciences.especially in recent years when they have given Oscars to a rap group for best song and to Heath Ledger for Best Supporting Actor for a performance that could be given by any angry, perpetually wet circus clown.JUST BECAUSE he died. Is anybody dumb enough to think he would have had even a nomination.even a MENTION of a nomination if he had lived??? Good luck with your rose colored glasses. Be that as it may, "Dolores Claiborne" is a truly brilliant film. I think one of the most brilliant films ever made, and one of the most sadly overlooked.
-
Sunflower007 — 16 years ago(July 25, 2009 10:54 PM)
~ I always thought that Kathy Bates deserved the oscar for this role. Her performance was excellent & justible.
That was definely a huge oscar mistake.
~
~
~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~
"
So the lion fell in
love with the lamb.
What a stupid lamb.
What a sick, masochistic lion
."
Edward Cullen & Bella Swan from
Twilight -
tambourine_man36 — 16 years ago(August 09, 2009 11:32 PM)
This is probably the best Stephen King adaptation out there maybe tied with Carrie at the very least. But all the acting was top-notch. I've learned to care less and less about what the academy thinks qualifies as good acting these days.
But where are people getting that Gwenyth Paltrow is the winner for the same year Dolores Claiborne was released?? The winner for 1995 Best Actress was Susan Sarandon for Dead Man Walking. She was a worthy winner but they could have left out Sharon Stone in Casino and put who really deserved to be nominated: Kathy Bates. -
jim_burt — 11 years ago(November 10, 2014 02:04 AM)
If an actor could give only one performance in their entire career and have that one performance be the entirety of their careerno actor could wish for a more perfect showcase than Kathy Bates had in "Dolores Claiborne".
Pretty much says it all. And great performances all around by Christopher Plummer, Jennifer Jason Leigh and Judy Parfit. If it hadn't been written by Stephen King, perhaps this would have received the accolades it so richly deserved. -
Dreamsville — 9 years ago(November 08, 2016 06:39 PM)
Witness Gwyneth Paltrow's win this same year. What moron could look at that performance and even begin to compare it with the work that Bates does here? The deep criminality of the snub does not end with Bates.
Dolores Claiborne
was released in 1995.
Shakespeare In Love
was released in 1998, so Gwyneth Paltrow did not wrongly win her Oscar over Kathy Bates (though Paltrow did not deserve to win for 1998 either). The actress who won for 1995, the year Bates should have been nominated (and arguably should have won) for
Dolores Claiborne
, was Susan Sarandon in
Dead Man Walking
.
