The Oscars have an undeserved rep of being sentimental to oldtimers when as you note the opposite is quite true, they usually give to the "it girl" of the moment or the biggest box office star. I think Judi Dench does have a better shot than most senior actresses at a (second) Oscar if only because she is seen as a contemporary (if elderly) actress rather than many of the others are considered "yesterday's stars" (or no-star character actors) and handicapped by that.
I agree she deserved an Oscar for Philomena - I think it's her best work ever.

I don't think Judi would have went no matter the odds were.

In another year, Judi Dench would've been my pick for Best Actress but she and Cate Blanchett had the misfortune of going against each other. Either one of them would've been deserving of the trophy.

There are reports saying she won't make it to the ceremony because she's in India filming. She missed it in 2001 because her husband passed away and in 2007 she was in hospital recovering from knee surgery.

As wonderful as Dame Judi was in/as Philomena, Cate Blanchett will win this year and deservedly so.

I read something in a mag about how the age of oscar winners has actually risen. So that's a good thing I'd imagine. Streep did well butshe was kinda just a miserable character that didn't learn much. Adams was good and Sandra was really nothing special (no way she will win). Blancehtt is her only competition I think but these award showsare a little fishy. Dench could get it.
"the day I tried to live, I learned that I was alive"