Tell us again.. Why Kathy Bates was not nominated for an Oscar?
-
JavierBoredom — 11 years ago(November 10, 2014 03:22 PM)
The only reason Diane Keaton wasn't nominated for 'Looking for Mr. Goodbar' is because she was nominated for 'Annie Hall' instead that year both were 1977 releases. Her contrasting roles in the two films is part of what led to her Oscar win that year.
-
OldFriendOfTheChristys — 12 years ago(March 21, 2014 05:04 AM)
Dolores Claiborne is one of the best films based on a Stephen King novel. How italong with Batess performancewas overlooked is a mystery to me. She is far better in this than she is in the overratedif still entertainingMisery.
-
janet-conant — 11 years ago(May 18, 2014 07:57 AM)
I can't believe it either that Elizabeth Shue was nominated and Kathy Bates wasn't. Anyone could have played Shue's part. She was incredibly mediocre. Bates was fabulous but then again she always is. I also didn't think Stone should have been nominated or Sarandon. I always wondered why she got the Oscar. Kathy won for 1990 and should have won for 1995. It's just politics but Bates continues to produce great work and Shue is nowhere to be found.
-
EliKahn — 11 years ago(May 26, 2014 09:55 AM)
No matter how campy the movie was and the subject matter, she transformed into Joan Crawford
Actually, Dunaway's performance was nothing like the real Joan Crawford.
It's really just Dunaway being herself.
If you watch footage of Crawford, you can see she was never how Dunaway portrayed her - the speaking voice and mannerisms are nothing like Crawford.
Even Christina Crawford (who wrote the book) said Dunaway was horrible in the film. -
mitch_rh — 11 years ago(September 19, 2014 03:13 AM)
WehoSteve, you bring up a good point. Interestingly enough, on the DVD commentary, Taylor Hackford himself mentions his astonishment that Bates didn't get a nomination, however he then goes on to say that the film wasn't submitted to the Academy for awards consideration. The Academy never actually saw the film according to Hackford. Why, I don't know. Perhaps it was released too late and was considered ineligible, or perhaps like you said Steve, the studio just didn't bother to push to get it considered. Who knows.
Anyway, Shelley Duvall was overlooked for 3 Women, just as Mia Farrow was for Rosemary's Baby. The same goes for Leonardo DiCaprio for Revolutionary Road, and also Liv Ullmann for Scenes from a Marriage.
So when it comes to recognising talent, I don't actually have faith in the Academy anyway. -
JavierBoredom — 11 years ago(November 11, 2014 06:55 AM)
Dolores Claiborne
was released in March of '95 and only made a mild box-office impact. By the time Oscar voting came around in January of '96, it was history in the minds of its studios, Columbia Pictures and Castle Rock. Columbia threw its weight behind its year-end awards contender
Sense and Sensibility
and its other Castle Rock awards season co-productions,
The American President
and
Othello
. Their earlier releases that year (which included
Dolores Claiborne
,
To Die For
, and
Beyond Rangoon
) were left in the dust.
End result: Seven Oscar nominations for
Sense and Sensibility
, including Best Picture. One nomination for
The American President
(Music Score). Zero nominations for the rest. Maybe not the best plan. (Nicole Kidman was at least nominated for the Golden Globe [and won] for
To Die For
. Kathy Bates wasn't so lucky nor was Patricia Arquette [
Beyond Rangoon
]. Columbia had five potential Best Actress contenders that year Emma Thompson, Annette Bening, Nicole Kidman, Kathy Bates, and Patricia Arquette. They put all their muscle behind Thompson and Bening.)
At the very least,
Dolores Claiborne
deserved Oscar nominations for Actress, Adapted Screenplay, Cinematography, Make Up, and Music Score. It received none of them. But such are the ways of Oscar. -
lishak-c — 10 years ago(December 10, 2015 01:08 PM)
I have to say I have a top 10 films of all time and for me Dolores Claiborne is in it and each time I see it I get chills at the acting from each person. It is by far the best film not to get much of a look in. And for me Kathy Bates was far better then in Misery. And also the film is far better so not sure what went wrong. But can see this being a film that in years to come will really take off.