Swank or Benning

Yes, I agree, and I have heard that Hilary Swank has been heralded as the "new Jodie Foster", and has "pulled off a Jodie" from my friends who were upset that Miss Bening lost the Oscar for "Being Julia". Her role in "Being Julia" I think is one of the greatest roles of the new century, the first that of Ellen Burstyn's "Sara Goldfarb" from 2000's "Requiem for a Dream". Like the audacious "RFAD", "Being Julia" was also a flim which captivated critcs and intellectual audiences, but wasn't seen much by mainstream audiences; nor were the roles for both films the "typicial" norm that you see Hollywood actresses often win for. The Academy seems to love rewarding roles that are portrayed by an underdog character and Hilary Swank's "Million Dollar Baby" has that screaming all over it. But "Being Julia", like Gloria Swanson's "Sunset Blvd" and Bette Davis's "Whatever Happened to Baby Jane?" and "All About Eve" is a kind of role that because it is over-the top, divalicious, and rather theatrical, its the kind of flamboyant role that conservative judges might find way too bold or distasteful. After all, Julia Lambert, Norma Desmond, Margo Channing, Sara Goldfarb and Baby Jane Hudson were all characters who were selfish, egotistical and over the top. But, it does not mean they shouldn't recieve the Award. It really shoud be of merit, but the Academy loves conservative roles, so they gave it to Swank. Perhaps, by noting, only Vivien Leigh's "Blanche Du Bois" is the only character that has the stature of a "Baby Jane Hudson" who has won an Oscar, way back in 1951.

Go Annette Bening!...and Julianne Moore, Patricia Clarkson, Kate Winslet, Glenn Close, Sigourney Weaver, Helena Bonham Carter, Natasha Richardson, Lynn Redgrave. You are divas that rock, and haven't won Oscars!

Julianne should have won for 2002's "Far From Heaven".
Kate Winslet should have won for 2001's "Iris".
Glenn Close should have beaten Jodie Foster, for "Dangerous Liasons" 1988.
Helena Bonham Carter should have won for 1997's "The Wings of the Dove", instead of Helen Hunt--surprise, surprise, a role in "As Good as it Gets".
Lynn Redgrave should have won for 1998's "Gods and Monsters".

Annette Bening is a great actress. IMO Hillary Swank is not. Bening is one of a handful of outstanding actresses of her generation. Swank is, again IMO, not one of the top 20 actresses in HER generation.

Sometimes an actor or actress comes along and give a performance that is so wonderful, that it deserves recognition even if there is not much else in the body of work. Mira Sorvino comes to mind, and Emily Watson though she didn't win. Or perhaps the body of work is there, but not widely known -- I am thinking of Juliette Binoche.

At some point the Academy has to stop rewarding flash-in-the-pan performances that satisfy a certain politically-correct attitude. Good films with a gay theme/ pro-abortion theme/ pro-euthanasia theme/anti-business theme/anti-death-penalty theme/ anti-American theme, have a chance to win an Oscar. Good films with a pro-religious theme, or a pro-life theme, a patriotic American theme or a pro-capitalist theme have a zero chance. Everyone knows this -- Mel Gibson knew that the Academy would hate "The Passion of the Christ" no matter how good it was or how he promoted it. (I haven't seen Passion myself, yet.)

Of course the Academy won't change, and instead it will become even more irrelevant. TV viewers will continue to watch to proceedings, but they will be less and less influenced in their ticket-buying decisions. Hollywood appears clueless to the extent that so much of America is disgusted by its products. I expect Hollywood will continue to make, and congratulate itself for making, even more films that mature audiences will not care to view. Roger Ebert might like them... but gradually even Roger Ebert is becoming irrelevant. Too bad.

Although Swank is one of my favorite actresses, I'd say Benning did a better job in Beijing Julia than Swank in Million Dollar Baby. The Oscar should have gone to Benning. There are many superb scences. The last time they were competing though, I still think Swank did better in Boys don't Cry. They should have won one Oscar each maybe.

Or is it similar to what Irons commented on Julia's last performance of the first play (right after Tom broke up with Julia), that it is too drama? By the way why did he say those harsh words to Julia back then? What is his intention, to make her take a braek?

Does anyone also think Benning could be a possible senior version of Naomi Watts? Maybe just me.

I don't even think Swank's performance in Million Dollar Baby deserved a nomination.

Thanks for sharing your thoughts so eloquently. I am here to join the "Annette was robbed" support group. The decision to give Swank the Academy Award over Bening still really bothers me to this day, so much so I have a hard time watching Swank's newer movies without thinking about it. I know I need to get a life, but this was the most illogical decision since Don Ameche got the "I'm going to die, give me an award" Oscar for Cocoon.

As others have pointed out in this thread, I think the only reason I can think of that Swank got the award is because of what her CHARACTER went through, NOT her acting in that character. I know it doesn't make sense, but we see it all the time at the Academy Awards, a sympathetic character wins over a better performance of a less sympathetic character. (Remember Tom Hanks in Philadelphia and Forrest Gump, playing a dying man and a retarded man?) I guess it also matters if there is a physical transformation, though that has little to do with acting, and more to do with dieticians and trainers. So Swank got undeserved votes for beefing up her physique and learning how to box. Then she sealed the deal by spitting up blood in a sad and uncomfortable death scene in the hospital.

But these peripheral parts of the script and her training had nothing to do with how good her performance was. Though she may have deserved a nomination, there is just no comparison to Bening's stunningly layered and nuanced performance in Being Julia. For example, when Jeremy Irons' character confronts her about her overacting, she goes from contentment to abject anger to deep despair in less than three minutes time, all effortlessly and with a deep understanding of what she was doing. I haven't even discussed the pure charisma she exudes in every scene, which is something Swank just doesn't have.

I know I need to get a life, but I'm hoping that the Oscars can eventually find its way to rewarding the best, not the most popular.

I think Swank is taking an unneccesary beating just because she was only able to get two truly great roles. It shouldn't matter she was great in those roles. I think she absolutely deserved her Oscar for Boys Don't Cry. Had Benning beat her for American Beauty I would have been pissed because i felt Benning was the weakest link in that film! And as for 2004. I wouldn't have voted for Hillary or Annette I would have voted for Kate Winslet. And as far as the thing about Swank's being showy I think Swank is a subtle actress! It's Benning's two performanves that were showy!

And Jodie Foster deserved her performance for the Accused (as well as the other one for Lambs) but I can see why some might have wanted Close or Streep or Weaver to win after all that was one hell of a category but Foster is amazing and so raw and powerful in The Accused too. Perhaps that's why they compare Swank to Foster because not only does she take on underdog roles but she is capable of being very powerful and subtle at the same time. I don't appreciate

I just caught Being Julie the other night on the Sundance channel. What a wonderful surprise! I have to say that Benning's characters are more flushed out and "complete" in all the subtleties she adds; which I might add take great skill. It is much harder to play a scene with the small things than the big. From her mannerisms, voice inflections, small facial expressions, movements and gestures, you really lose yourself in the character. That is what makes her so amazing.

With Hillary, as much as I have loved the roles, I always still feel like I am watching "Hillary" to some degree. Though, to her credit, Hillary can do "poignant" scenes very well.

Way to go Annette. I do think she should have won. This performance was fun and a real 'tour de force'. I highly recommend the movie!

Swank does fine. I am a huge Bening fan, though.


Watch My TV Show!:
www.drxcreatures.com