MovieChat Forums > 10 Rillington Place (1971) Discussion > Why no awards?

Why no awards?

posted 10 years ago by trimmerb1234
2 replies | jump to latest

John Hurt received a nomination but no award, Richard Attenborough nothing yet both were outstanding performances - the contrast between the characters could hardly been sharper. Attenborough, having created the indelibly memorable villain "Pinkie" in "Brighton Rock" here created a wholly different but memorable murderer - creepy and as sinister and deadly as a large spider, his prey, innocent, pretty and naive young women who in their desperation were forced to trust him. The grubbiness and greyness of a poor area of London circa 1949 which now is home to the wealthy was particularly well portrayed - no award for set design either.

The film got critical approval at the time, it remains highly rated, was it just too grim and unpleasant to receive awards?

[–] michael-daunt 9 years ago

Re: set design

This was filmed at 8 Rillington Place. Not much set design required.

I agree that Hurt and Attenborough both gave the best performances of their long and distinguished careers.

[–] iadorepink 8 years ago

The Oscars, Bafta's, ect. Don't like to nominate or let characters such as John Christie or other performances that are disturbing win, They like to go with safe choices, Such as passing up Ian Holm in Alien and Robert Duvall in Apocalypse now for an undeserving Melvyn Douglas in Being There. But there was no reason to pass up John Hurt.