( +1 hidden )
July 14, 2015 at 6:19 am #190203
Just finally watched “Vera Drake” (after having caught the first half of the movie months ago) and I totally loved it. Mike Leigh is such a great director, I am really in awe of his talent. Yet I do not know which one I prefer – “Secrets and Lies” or “Vera Drake”? Both were terrific AND both lead actresses delivered great performances. Too bad neither Blethyn nor Staunton actually claimed the gold. They would have been very deserving winners IMO. What do you think? Who should have claimed the Best Actress award 2005: Staunton, Swank (“MDB”; actual winner); Bening (“Being Julia”), Winslet (“Eternal…”) or Moreno (“Maria Full of Grace”)? I am about to rewatch the performances and I am curious about your thoughts.
Imelda Staunton was clearly the critics’ darling claiming the prestigious NYFCC, NSFC, LAFCA and the BAFTA. Nevertheless, she lost… Why? Was Swank more deserving? Did she finish a close second? Or did Bening even get ahead of her (have to watch this performance, too!)? Let’s rediscuss! 🙂July 14, 2015 at 6:37 am #190205
Haven’t seen Moreno or Bening yet, but between the other three, I would’ve preferred to see Staunton or Winslet take it. Hilary Swank was good, but the role wasn’t really much of a stretch for her.July 14, 2015 at 6:59 am #190206
Swank won because she rode the coattails of that cinematic version of a fecaloma. Mike Leigh’s petrified close-up in Imelda Staunton’s terrified face when she is confessing the real natures of her job is MILES better than the entirety of what Swank did in Million Dollar Baby. I’m sure a large portion of the voters went for her because the sad ending of her character’s arc but that shouldn’t be a factor when you have Imelda and Kate Winslet (in one of her few roles that actually impressed me) in the same line-up. Catalina and Annette would never gonna take the Oscar, for different reasons but Winslet and specially Staunton could and most importantly – should have.July 14, 2015 at 7:21 am #190207
I never unterstood what people have against Swank’s win. I personally think she was amazing and completely belieavable in her role. Most people say Kate Winslet (or Stauton) should have won the Oscar, but Winslet did nothing for me in ESOTSM… Btw, am I the only one who thinks Julie Delpy is criminally underrated in Before Sunset in the same year? IMO she definitely should have been nominated for her brilliant performance in that movie.July 14, 2015 at 8:11 am #190208
Clint, Haggis, physical transformation/injury, WB, low budget/high returns…not surprising that she won. Plus, she’s terrific.July 14, 2015 at 10:50 am #190209
Id say Stauton in Vera Drake was the best but Hilary was a good winner.July 14, 2015 at 12:53 pm #190210
Of the very few things I’ll never forgive to the Academy, is the win of Swank over Winslet in here. How dare you. Losing to Staunton or Moreno, I wouldn’t be ok, but to Swank?!July 14, 2015 at 12:59 pm #190211
Hillary was good, but the whole narrative built up around a Hillary vs. Bening rematch was such nonsense. I don’t think either deserved it over Imelda (though I do prefer Swank to Bening that year).
My ballot would have looked like:
July 14, 2015 at 5:41 pm #190212
- Uma Thurman for Kill Bill
- Imelda Staunton for Vera Drake
- Moon So-ri for Oasis
- Fatoumata Coulibaly for Moolaadé
- Kimberly Elise for Woman Thou Art Loosed
I think Hilary deserved her win for this. I loved Million Dollar Baby and I thought Swank gave an excellent performance. Stauton was my 2nd place that year. She was really great in that movie. Being Julia just didn’t do anything for me. I love Annette and think she should have an Oscar but I am so happy it wasn’t Being Julia. Moreno was good but I wouldn’t have nominated her. I don’t understand Kate’s nomination. She dyed her hair and cried alot. Woo hoo. Some noticeable absences that I would have included would be Julia Roberts “Closer”, Emmy Rossum “Phantom of the Opera”, and I would have bumped up both Sophie Olydenko “Hotel Rwanda” and Laura Linney “Kinsey” to lead. Both were very much the leads of their movies.July 14, 2015 at 8:45 pm #190213
Staunton should have won for this, and then won for Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix.October 23, 2015 at 1:12 pm #190214
I don’t get how some can say Jodie Foster gave one of the best performances ever in Silent of the Lambs (she barely deserve the Oscar in my eyes) but Hilary Swank did not deserve her Oscar. When a film is iconic, some tend to overrate the performances. Swank was outstanding in Million Dollar Baby. She did have competition from Imelda but she swept awards season winning all major awards besides BAFTA. Swank deserved both of her Oscars imo.October 23, 2015 at 2:23 pm #190215
I saw the title of this thread and was already prepared to give a speech what a great year this was for actresses and how the Oscars went for the wrong gals in leading actress category and how my girl should have quite easily won that year and was so terribly overlooked (MTV audition scene is one of the best pieces of acting I’ve ever seen, Curtis Hanson is an asbolute actor’s director) but somehow OP is talking about 2004 race so please change the title of this thread.
As for my answer, Imelda Staunton should have won this one in a cakewalk. Masterclass acting if there ever was one. My second choice of the nominees would have been Kate Winslet and then Catalina Sandino Moreno. I didn’t care for Bening and Swank.October 23, 2015 at 2:28 pm #190216
I was just about to say the same this is 2004. Swank and Staunton are both fantastic. I marginally prefer Staunton but have no problem at all with Swanks win.October 23, 2015 at 3:31 pm #190217
For a while, I was guilty of dismissing Swank’s win for M$B. I watched the film again recently and realized how strong of a performance it is and worthy of the win. I can only speak for myself but I think a lot of people dismiss it because Swank won twice within five years and the general consensus is her winning performance in Boys Don’t Cry is just way better.
I believe I read once Sandra Bullock and Ashley Judd were offered M$B but Bullock couldn’t because of scheduling conflicts with Miss Congeniality 2 and I don’t know why Judd couldn’t/didn’t. I wonder if either of them would have won (which would have been great for Ashley Judd’s career) because on paper, it seemed like it was a role destined to win Lead Actress, no matter who was playing it.
My most heartbreaking Lead Actress nomination-snub comes from this year: Kill Bill: Vol. 2‘s Uma Thurman. The Academy embraced Quentin Tarantino before Kill Bill and they have embraced him afterwards. Splitting the film may have made it more accessible but it squashed its award chances… Not a single nom for either film. As great as Swank was in M$B, Thurman could and should have swept the entire season just like Julianne Moore did this past year.