Today was my first day watching Born Yesterday, and I was actually very interested to see Holiday's performance, thinking I'd be blown away...boy was I wrong. I can't believe she won over Bette Davis.
________________________________________________
Sorry if I sound like a b!tch, it's because I am.
[deleted]
Truth be told, Anne Baxter insisted on being billed (and nonminted) as a Actress in a Leading Role rather than a Supporting Role. This split the vote between her and Davis and that is what cost both of them
shareYou are so wrong.
She totally deserved to win over the overrated Bette.
Judy Holiday was wonderful as Billie. thought she deserved her Oscar. it was a tough year with some good actresses. Also liked Bette Davis in All about Eve. Glad to read Judy Holiday won the Oscar.
shareAnne Baxter insisted on being billed (and nonminted) as a Actress in a Leading Role...
To this day I cannot watch any Anne Baxter performance!! I have never forgiven her for stealing Bette Davis' chance - a chance which I think Bette Davis roundly deserved for All About Eve. However, this was a good performance too. Were it not for Anne Baxter, I would have wagered that Bette Davis was the strongest contender.
I've never bought into the idea that, because Anne Baxter was nominated as Best Actress, rather than Best Supporting Actress, she deprived Bette of her Oscar® because she "split the vote". In the first place, this assumes that a majority of those who voted for Anne would otherwise have voted for Bette. 'Tain't necessarily so! All of Anne's votes would have been divided between the other four nominees, and there is no way of predicting how they would have voted, under those circumstances. This leads me to my second point: if Anne had not been nominated, somebody else would have been in her place, which would have changed the dynamic of the race completely. Suppose, instead of Anne Baxter, the other nominee was Kate Hepburn for "Adam's Rib", or Gertrude Lawrence for "The Glass Menagerie", or Joan Crawford for "Harriet Craig". See what I mean?
Besides, in those days, it was up to the studio to determine in which category to submit nominees, and it was Darryl F. Zanuck of Fox who chose to nominate Bette and Anne in the same category. After all, the movie is called "All About Eve", not "All About Margo".
Here's another scenario: Suppose that "Adam's Rib", released at the end of 1949 but nominated for the 1950 awards, had been nominated for the '49 awards instead. Suppose Judy had been nominated for Best Supporting Actress in that film, and won, instead of Mercedes McCambridge. Now, Judy gets nominated again in '50 for "Born Yesterday", but voters feel she just got the Oscar® for a similar performance, and enough place their votes elsewhere for someone else to win, possibly Bette. So, if it will make you feel any better, blame M-G-M and/or the Academy for nominating "Adam's Rib" in '50 rather than '49!
The point is, in a five-way race, anything can happen. Just ask Roz Russell! Under those circumstances, you only need to win more votes than anyone else, not a majority. You can win an Oscar® with as few votes as one more than 20%.
I hope you will now be able to watch Anne Baxter movies with a clear conscience.
Well, I can't just call out "Oh, butler", can I? Somebody's name may be "Butler"!
@ libearian
Your response was perfection from A to Z!
"Bless your little pea-pickin' hearts."--Tennessee Ernie Ford
Swanson is definitely the best. She has the most iconic character - and the most difficult. It's heavy drama meets biting satire. Swanson plays it crazy but keeps it real. She's magnetic and dynamic. As great as Davis always is, she had many more challenging roles. And Holliday, well, she did a nice job and had to be funny, appealing, and dramatic. But other than the voice, it was just a nice, subtle performance. The movie is dated, and neither it nor her performance are in the same league as Sunset Blvd. and Dietrich.
shareIn my honest opinion, it is Gloria Swanson's performance in Sunset Blvd that has stood the test of time and should have won the Oscar that year. Bette Davis gave a memorable performance as Margo and comes in Second, I think. Judy Holliday gave a delightful performance in this film and comes in Second. Eleanor Parker, while I liked Caged, is not in the same league here. And Anne Baxter? What an ego--had she been in the Supporting category, she would have won--hands down, but by insisting she be pushed for the leading category, she doomed both herself and Bette Davis.
share[deleted]
I would personally have given the award to Swanson, but Holiday was very good in this film. I don't like how comedic roles are constantly devalued...it is just as difficult to do comedy well as drama.
*****************
What aspect of her performance did you not like? Or was it the character herself?
Perhaps you have (or have not) known persons like this (of either sex) who cultivate their outsides instead of their insides, and are perfectly content living that way -- until something turns on a light in them that they are missing out on much that stimulates and engages them.
As for the performance, I thought it was spot on for the type of character she was attempting to portray (and considering she had an IQ of 172 in R/L, what an acting job that required!)
In my opinion, none of the other nominess can give justice to the Billie Dawn character. That is why Ms. Holliday won the Oscar. Plain and Simple.
share