Susan Sarandon's Oscar- deserved?

BEST ACTRESS 1995
Susan Sarandon, Dead Man Walking
Elisabeth Shue, Leaving Las Vegas
Sharon Stone, Casino
Meryl Streep, The Bridges of Madison County
Emma Thompson, Sense and Sensibility

Personally I don't think she did. She was good, but most reviews single out Sean Penn as best in show and rarely ever talk about Sarandon's "money" scenes (which happen at the end when she starts showing vulnerability and tears). It's a pretty nuanced performance. I remember rooting for her to win because it was her 5th nomination, and she should have won for Thelma & Louise (1991). She had lost for The Client (1994) the year before, and also Lorenzo's Oil (1992) and Atlantic City (1981), the latter being a supporting role even though she was a leading contender.

So why did she win? 1995 was considered the strongest lineup for contemporary lead actress nominees ever, with Nicole Kidman (To Die For, should have won actually), Kathy Bates (Dolores Claiborne) and Jennifer Jason Leigh (Georgia) not even nominated. Alicia Silverstone (Clueless) also deserves a mention for her strong comedic work in the Amy Heckerling adaptation of Emma. Sarandon won the SAG award, but other then that was absent from ballots. She was supposed to win the Golden Globe (Drama) honor, but in an upset the prize went to Sharon Stone's strong but over the top scream fest in Martin Scorsese's Casino, aka GoodFellas Part II.

Elisabeth Shue was the critics darling in Leaving Las Vegas, and her costar Nicolas Cage ended up winning the Oscar for Leading Actor. But perhaps her role was too controversial, and hasn't aged well on repeat viewings 23 years later. Emma Thompson shouldn't have been nominated despite her movie being the only Best Picture contender. We had seen her do this kind of work before, only stronger (The Remains of the Day, Howards End). It was a filler choice no doubt. Finally, Meryl Streep delivers her best work of the 90s (One True Thing neck and neck) in Clint Eastwood's adaptation of the romance novel by Robert James Waller. It was her 10th nod, and was proof she could basically get cited for anything; she has 21 nominations as of 2018. Had it not been for the mute release in the summer, despite a steady box-office of about $60 million, Streep could have squeezed in Oscar number 3 here.

Back to Sarandon. It seems she won because she was overdue. It was not something I recall being based on merit. Does anyone thing she deserved this trophy? Again, the bulk of the reviews on message boards and critics seem to bypass her and go right to Sean Penn. And yeah, he has a showier role (and also can relate to it; rumor was he was a domestic abuser himself, tying up Madonna in the 80s and almost killing her). Was the public just fascinated by this bad boy gone soft? Did Sarandon's role come off too quiet? I thought it was certainly powerful, but I also felt it was a role that benefited from the story being so powerful, and the fact that she was being directed by her "partner" Tim Robbins.

My pick would have easily been Nicole Kidman. How could she win the Golden Globe, Broadcast Film Critics and Boston Society of Film Critics and then not even make the final five? Disgraceful. It's her best work to date, not to mention her sexiest. If not Kidman, Kathy Bates was miles above the nominees too. Dolores Claiborne is her masterpiece. I think the film was just marketed wrong (Stephen King = horror according to film distributors). And Dolores Claiborne was not a horror film. It was a psychological drama about domestic abuse, incest and murder.