I mean, really! She is maybe like barely a minute there in the whole film! And her charachter Felicia was nothing special. I don't understand it.
If anyone should have won an Oscar, it should have been the far better Julie Christie for her charming portrey of Jackie. She offered a lot more and was much more memorable.
Because she was brilliant!!!
Well,I think ALL actors were wonderful in this movie:Warren Beatty,Goldie Hawn,Julie Christie,Jack Warden.....but Lee Grant's Felicia for me is the icing on the cake!!
Just watch how she looks at Julie Christie during that Elevation dinner or when Goldie Hawn comes into the salon.The woman can say more with just a look than others with hundred words.
But that's just my opinion ;-)
When I watched the movie for the first time, I thought she was the worst winner ever in that category! I agree, nothing special in a boring role. But since then, my opinion has grown about her performance, but still...she surely didn't win for the role alone, it was a career-award.
shareOh no, I'm with Lady-Claire on this 'un. She's very touching as an ageing Beverly Hills broad with nothing to look forward to save for plastic surgery and the desperate pursuit of men young enough to be her son. Plus she's bloody funny at the election party. As for La Christie, well, she seems distracted the whole time, like she's worried she forgot to lock her door before coming to the set that day, or something.
share[deleted]
This is the only time I ever predicted an Oscar as I was coming out of the movie theater. As I walked out of the theater after seeing this movie for the first time, I actually said to myself, "Lee Grant was amazing, she'll win the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress." This is the only time I predicted an Oscar before the nominations were even announced.
shareI predicted it last year when I saw Little Miss Sunshine at Sundance Film Festival and watched Alan Arkin give a hillarious performance. My friends thought that I was far too optomistic and even doubted that he'd even get a nomination. But I just knew.
Georgie Boy
I agree with you on this somewhat. I thought she was very good, good enough to deserve her Oscar nod, but there is no way she was better than either Ronnie Blakely or Lily Tomlin ( who did deserve it ) for Nashville. I think it may have been due to sympathy since her career was cut way short after she was blacklisted in the 50's & 60's.
shareRonee Blakely and Lily Tomlin were both brilliant in NASHVILLE, but for some reason, I didn't have the same feeling I did when I walked out of the theater after seeing SHAMPOO...something just said to me that Lee Grant would win Best Supporting Actress. It's also possible that Blakely and Tomlin being in the same film might have cancelled each other out.
shareShe was very good in this movie in my opinion. Her portrayal as the stylish, bored but still sexually voracious wife of a powerful investor who knows that she's not getting any younger seemed pretty spot on. Her guiltless infidelity (just like every other one of the film's main characters) is amusing to watch but also sort of depressing at the same time. Shampoo came out more than a decade before I was born but it serves as a telling social coommentary of late 60's sexual mores and social issues. For those looking for a simpler reason to watch this, it's a fun if dated sex farce with an great cast.
P.S. Also I believe the Academy may have felt sympathetic towards her for being shafted so badly by the HUAC two decades before this like so many other people in the business.
As someone who saw this film during its original theatrical release, I'm impressed to see the film appreciated by someone who hadn't even born when it was released.
shareLee Grant is the one! Detective Story, The Landlord, Plaza Suite, Voyage of the Damned, In the Heat of the Night, Valley of the Dolls, Divorce, American Style, Tell Me a Riddle. . .
"It's only a mooovie!"
alfie
I think it was Hollywood's way of saying, "Sorry about the Blacklisting." She'd languished in TV for so long.
shareI think 1975 was a pretty strong year for the Best Supporting Actress category and that really any of the ladies deserved it, including Miss Grant and I'm genuinely glad that she won it. Perhaps The Academy voters gave it to her as a career Oscar, but in the end I think she deserved it for her funny and touching performance as the bored, mixed-up Beverly Hills housewife. Even the difficult-to-please Pauline Kael praised Grant highly in this film. I can respect the original poster's opinion that she wasn't Oscar-worthy as everyone is entitled to their own belief, but to say that she was only in the film for a few minutes is completely off. She actually has quite a bit of screen time compared to other Oscar-winning supporting performances...Judi Dench is in SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE for about eight minutes and Beatrice Straight is in NETWORK about the same length.
share[deleted]