The general consensus seems to be that Joan Fontaine's Academy Award was actually belated recognition for her performance in REBECCA, but I have to say that I think her work in SUSPICION is just as impressive. An Oscar for either performance would be well-deserved in my opinion.
shareAn Oscar for either performance would be well-deserved in my opinion.
Granted, I don't particularly like the screen persona Fontaine seemed to be cultivating and find it generally annoying, but even trying to put personal preferences aside, I don't see how could she have possibly won over Barbara Stanwyck (and for The Lady Eve, not Ball Of Fire she was nominated for). Bette Davis in The Little Foxes was also better than Fontaine's timid displays here.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
Franz,
We get you dont like Fontaine for some ridiculous reason. Timid displays? Is that not what Hitchcock wanted from her?
Joan was the only actor who ever got an Oscar in a Hitchcock film. I think you need to move past your irrational hating.
Ans who are you to order another on who to dislike/like. You that self-important? You're the ridiculous hipster.
shareYou know I might as well suggest you get past your irrational championing of Fontaine over everyone else, which certainly has as much to do with "some ridiculous reason" like your being smitten with her persona as my so-called "hating" has to do with my slight (and admitted) annoyance with the way she usually presented herself on screen. And I put "hating" in quotation marks for a reason as it's hardly a sign of hatred, irrational or otherwise, to prefer Stanwyck or Davis for the 1941 Oscar award - especially as I think Fontaine did a good job with what she was given.
"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan
"Bette Davis in The Little Foxes was also better than Fontaine's timid displays here."
I suppose it is possible you merely spoke with insufficient clarity there if you meant to say "I think Fontaine did a good job with what she was given."
As far as championing Fontaine, I do concede I think she was excellent in Suspicion. The timid displays you referred to were in fact NOT the whole performance by any means, and when they were present were in fact entirely called for in terms of her character and the direction.
And of course at the time Hitchcock could have worked with pretty much anyone he wanted to, and chose to work with Fontaine as his female lead two pictures in a row. I don't see what recognizing that has to do with being irrational.
[deleted]