How the hell did that happen?! She's a great actress and small time on screen can be Oscar worthy, but she was mediocre.. bland.. forgettable. I don't understand at all? Lauren Bacall was much better and wasn't even nominated.
shareI completely agree with you. Bacall should've gotten something for this role because of the layers of her character and the subtilties she put into her character-- I love the scene when they're all taking turns stabbing him because of her expression after she does it, like this whole tragedy can finally be put to rest. Also her standing there watching it, being startled a few times; her mournful, reflective, finally putting it to rest face right before the toast. Bergman is good, but Bacall really should've been recognized instead of her.
shareI just read the book and watched the film again... and I agree with you. Hell of a part for Bacall, and she made the most of it.
There's a moment when everyone is boarding trains, and the railway executive is telling the conductor to put "...the famous Hercule Poirot" on the train, and just as Mrs. Hubbard walks by. She hesitates for a moment, and if you know the story you can see that she's realizing that if she goes ahead with her plot, she is going to have to match wits with one of the greatest detectives alive. And the momentary hesitation is so brief you probably missed it, because it takes her less than a second to decide that she can beat him and damned if she's going to break character. It's a subtle moment, in a film full of hammy performances.
If she ever deserved a Best Supporting Oscar, it was for this.
" Jack, you have debauched my sloth! "
Great points, otter, thanks for sharing them. I just watched this last night, and was struck at how good, and layered, Bacall's performance was. Even during the murder scene I could barely take my eyes off her. I'm thinking it's worth going back and watching the film again, and focussing on Bacall just for moments like the one you described here. (Ditto, in fact, John Gielgud.)
Edited to add:
As for Ingrid Bergman ... I found her entertaining enough, I suppose, but a bit cartoonish, if I'm honest. I certainly wouldn't have voted her an Oscar for that performance. Surely it wasn't as simplistic as the beautiful, glamorous Bergman playing a character who was dowdy and dumb? Like Charlize Theron being "brave enough" to play ugly and gay?
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
Surely it wasn't as simplistic as the beautiful, glamorous Bergman playing a character who was dowdy and dumb?I think it was exactly that. Which is really not surprising.
Yes exactly, Dreamsville. ;-)
(Droll irony is so hard to convey on the Internet ...)
You might very well think that. I couldn't possibly comment.
I thought the whole cast was really good.
but Bacall was awesome..
I cried as I watched her expressions during the main scene...
I don't think that her performance in this film was worthy of an Oscar. And yet I found it enjoyable. She made me laugh. Whereas her more dramatic performances leave me cold.
shareMOTOE was nominated for 5 Oscars, and the Academy Voters wanted to give it SOMETHING (it was a huge hit.) Is it fair? no, but it happens all the time. Besides, it was probably more of a lifetime achievement accolade, than an award for this specific role.
Dude, it’s Beacon Hills.
It was nominated for six Oscars. But I'm not convinced by the reason you gave. The Color Purple and The Turning Point had 11 nominations and won nothing; Gangs of NY and American Hustle had 10 and won nothing. Just because a film has a lot of nominations doesn't mean it HAS to win something.
----------------------
http://viverdecinema.blogspot.com.br/
Totally agree with you. Bacall deserved that Oscar (besides, Bergman already had two). By the way, I remembered that there were 12 stabs (on Widmark), from 12 members of an imaginary jury, but 13 actors played the murderers: Bacall, Bergman, Bisset, Hiller, Connery, Redgrave, Perkins, Roberts, Blakely, Quilley, Gieulgud, Cassel and Michael York. But York, as Count Andrenyi was not personally affected by the kidnapping of the child (he was just "the husband"), so he and his wife (in the picture) applied the same stab to the body. Another thing, someone asked why Finney kept is head "pulled down between his shoulders like a scared turtle" (magnificent description). The purpose of this was to feign a double chin (Ben Gazzara did something similar when he played Al Capone in a very bad movie --with Stallone).
shareBy the way, I remembered that there were 12 stabs (on Widmark), from 12 members of an imaginary jury, but 13 actors played the murderers: Bacall, Bergman, Bisset, Hiller, Connery, Redgrave, Perkins, Roberts, Blakely, Quilley, Gieulgud, Cassel and Michael York. But York, as Count Andrenyi was not personally affected by the kidnapping of the child (he was just "the husband"), so he and his wife (in the picture) applied the same stab to the body.
Agree with you. Bacall should have won.
Visit my blog, Thoughtcream - [http://nairtejas.wordpress.com], and behold!
Damn right Bacall should have won, she was absolutely amazing. I watched the film this evening and once again was mesmerised by her performance.
The Long Walk stops every year, just once.
Hopefully Michelle Pfeiffer gets the Oscar this time.
Why am I so good at playing bitches? I think it’s because I’m not a bitch.-Bette Davis
[deleted]