MovieChat Forums > The Constant Gardener (2005) Discussion > Anyone else think Weisz shouldn't have w...

Anyone else think Weisz shouldn't have won the oscar?



I just didn't think she deserved it that much. Don't get me wrong, she played her role well, she was a good actress, but I just didn't think to play that particular role an actress would need a lot of skill anyway. I just couldn't understand why Weisz won it. In my opinion, Michelle Williams gave a much better performance in BBM than Weisz did in the Constant Gardner.

===================================
"You think you're safe. I say; Ha!" - Yuki Yubari, Kill Bill

reply

Neither Rachel Weisz OR Michelle Williams deserved the bloody Oscar.

Amy Adams was WAY ahead of the competition. Ebert even predicted right down the line that she would win, based on who was the best. Take that Ebert usually hits the nail on the head and you have a valuable source to what I'm saying.

Amy Adams was masterful, but not as experienced as Weisz... so therefore at a disadvantage due to the Academy's tendency to let experienced actors hog the awards.

reply

I personally thought that Amy Adams performance was way overrated for its own good and did not deserve to be nominated.

As for Ebert, he gave Van Helsing a thumbs up so you can't really take his opinions as face value.

reply

[deleted]

Can't help but feel that he'd say the same about you...

'What do you get if you take the 'ersia' out of Persiarick...?'

;0)

Ricos.

reply

Roger Ebert is a fine reviewer but he has not been very good in judging films in the last few years and his opinions have been rather strange.

reply

You don't say...?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

[deleted]

If you can call Ebert's reviews, "Insightful".

reply

[deleted]

Miss Weisz played a very complex character. I don't think anyone else could've pulled it off better than her. Watch the film again.
and for Michelle Williams....well let's just say that almost any girl with bad relationship memories can play her role.
she had like 3 lines in that movie, come on. ' you didn't go up there to fish...' haha.

reply

[deleted]

Well I know this may not be viewed well by some but personally I think the casting of Rachel Weisz was a really dumb thing.She just exudes both too much sickening and wicked sexuality for this role.

Having her character portrayed that way was too much of a contrast for her humanitarian efforts.Be for real do you honestly think someone with convictions for sounding off on the malpheasance inflicted on a group of people would conduct themselves in that trashy manner?

The director gave us scenes with her walking around the natives 'reaching out' and embracing.That was the most phoniest display of caring and loving for the downtrodden I've ever seen in a film.

Wrong actress here.

reply

[deleted]

allergysim

She won?And??????

reply

[deleted]

<And your opinion really means nothing.>

Ditto

reply

Great arguments, guys. Seriously. I mean it. Really well-backed up, deep thinking that hits the heart of the issue.

reply

What I really think Ms. Weisz should do is marry me; she is an absolute treasure, who has given a breathtaking, certainly oscar-worthy performance, in this film!!! BBM???

reply


Each 2 his own I guess.

=========================================
Please say that you care or say that you think that im beautiful -Elizabeth Short, The Black Dahlia

reply

Rachel Weisz did deserve but not nearly as much as Ralph Fiennes did he was fantastic and certainly deserves to get one, not just for CG but his past movies as well ie Schindler's List and my favourite The English Patient.

_-*~ I Love Ralph Fiennes ~*-_
<<<<<<<<<< _-*~ I wish ~*-_

reply

I agree that Ralph Fiennes deserved a nomination.

reply

Firstly I have to say I loved Rachel in the constant gardener. She was fab but dare I suggest she was misclassified for the Oscar. She should have been in the Best Actress section. I mean, she was almost in the entire movie and there was no other prominent females in the film? I think best supporting was an easier category to win. I still think she deserved the Oscar and had amazing chemistry with Fiennes. More movies with those two please!!

reply

You do need a lot of skill to play Rachel Weisz's role.. You don't need much skill to play Michelle Williams' role in Brokeback Mountain.

reply

I am sick and tired of people treating Brokeback Mountain as if its the most fantastic movie to grace the planet because its not.

Yes it is groundbreaking but I for one liked The Constant Gardener 100 times much more than BM and I strongly believe Fernando Meirelles and Ralph Fiennes were robbed off a Best Director and Best Actor as well as Best Picture noimination.

I would have lost all hope in the Academy had they NOT nominated Rachel Weisz for Best Supp Actress. She deeserves that Oscar more than anyone else this year. Its one of the most deserving Oscar wins since the long history of the Oscars and we don't need anyone else giving us another go at ''... she didn't deserve to win..'' etc.

I wonder if anyone else would have said that had Kate Winslet got the role and gone on to win :- NO everyone would have been soooooooooo........... happy!!!



-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
''You do need a lot of skill to play Rachel Weisz's role.. You don't need much skill to play Michelle Williams' role in Brokeback Mountain.''


-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Well said terminator 1493.

reply

[deleted]

Weisz was brilliant, deserved it 100%. Actually I would have been pissed if Williams won. Her performance (while very good) was vastly overrated, just like the film.


Thandie Newton was absolutely AWFUL in Crash! My God! Even Sandra *freakin* Bullock outacted her in that film. The same thing with Maria Bello. She was terrible in A History of Violence.

Keener gave an excellent silent performance. McDormand was good but I don't think she deserved her nod as her performance was nothing special. As for Amy Adams; no comment *haven't seen Junebug yet*.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I'm choking with laughter!

reply

i thought Rachel was great but i did not care for Maria Bello too much.

reply

You too?

reply

[deleted]

im fairly sure michelle williams didnt actually have to do anything in brokeback mountain except get it on with heath ledger and then stand around looking sad. Racheal Weisz actaully created a character that you could care about. but considering gwenyth platrow (who i really like but she shouldnt have won) apparently deserves an oscar over cate blancett, who can really tell!?

A is for Anna. B is for Brutus. H is for THE HIVES!!

reply

Weisz was odious in this film.

Don't talk nonsense.

;0)

Ricos.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

I used to hate her performance and had it listed as the most overrated of 2005, but then I saw it again. She gives one of the most natural performances of the year and brings fire to the role despite her delicate looks. I've got:

Amy Adams, Junebug
Michelle Williams, Brokeback Mountain
Rachel Weisz, The Constant Gardener
Juliette Binoche, Cache
Maria Bello, A History of Violence

Rachel moves up every time I see the film, though.

"We're wrecking like trains."

reply



I'm afraid I'm fresh out of sympathy. Can I interest you in a sarcastic comment?

reply

[deleted]

All you have to do is watch the movie to see how amazing Rachel Weisz did at making her character memorable and haunting throughout and she gave a full bodied performance. You really did believe this woman Tessa existed. The other nominees didn't hold a candle to Rachel Weisz's fully realized and fleshed out performance in the Constant Gardener. In fact Rachel was 10 times better than the one who won Best Actress that year. That's how good she was and she was just in a supporting role.

reply

nimrodsdaughter - you are so right. Whilst wathcing the film I forgot Tess was a character - Rachel became Tess.

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]