She was ok, but nothing extraordinary in either the looks or acting dept.
Too bad Patty Duke didn't accept the Graduate role when she was offered it; that would had been an Oscar winning performance.
This message has been deleted by an administrator
shareThis message has been deleted by an administrator
shareThis message has been deleted by an administrator
shareAnne Bancroft was a professional. She did not see it as degrading. She was not obsessed with age. She saw an excellent opportunity, a great script and went for it. She made Mrs. Robinson her own.
IMO, Ross did not have star quality. I did not see anything about her that screamed WOW.
Obviously she didn't think so or she wouldn't have taken the role. Sad that you're too stupid to comprehend that.
share'Ross was far too old for The Graduate. It was absolutely degrading for Anne Bancroft to play her mother when they're only 8 years apart, and Anne wasn't even a mother in real life yet.'
--------------------------
Degrading? I disagree: there was nothing "absolutely" degrading going on. I'm sure Anne would say the same.
She chose to play the role, and demonstated her middle-age via her acting, if not her make-up. If Anne(who always looked mature for her age) looked 40,and Ross,25,then that's only 15 yrs apart in a sense. We should all be so degraded to turn in a AA nominated performance. Also, what does Anne being a mother in real life have to do with it? Only mothers play mothers? (I do wish Duke had accepted,though.)
Now, since she Anne was only 7 yrs older than Dustin,was that degrading? Was Angela Langsbury degraded for playing Laurence Harvey's mother mother when she was about 8 yrs older than him?
It's the biz of acting.
and it was a great choice. Bancroft never yearned to be a movie star. She loved acting. The stage, TV, movies. I know you have no concept of this. I won't waste my time explaining it to you. You have no concept of movie making in that era. I won't waste my time with that explanation either. Bancroft had one helluva career.
yylt is obsessed with age. She gets her calculator out and gets it right down to the minute.
'I still say it was a degrading role for Anne. She wasn't an in-demand actress at all; it's not as if she had a bunch of other roles to chose from. She was 31 when she won an Oscar yet afterwards she only got 4 movies over the next 10 years; and they were all character roles, none of them romantic leading lady parts. She accepted the role in The Graduate because it was offered'
--------------------------
Excuse me, how do you know she was not in demand?
After her Oscar, she did more than just a few films, aside from the ones she may had turned down. She was again nominated in 64' for 'the Pumpkin Eater'. She picked her roles very discrimently, not just accepted whatever came along
I have no idea of what your definition of the word "degrading" in. Being in a porn flick or low-budget horror film may had been degrading,not 'The Graduate'.
What,because you would had felt degraded, means she should be? That is superficial thinking.