Home Forums Movies Why Does Everyone Hate Frances McDormand's Oscar Win For Three Billboards?

Why Does Everyone Hate Frances McDormand's Oscar Win For Three Billboards?

CREATE A NEW TOPIC
CREATE A NEW POLL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 67 total)
Created
3 months ago
Last Reply
2 months ago
66
( +1 hidden )
replies
3869
views
39
users
Joe Burns
14
JGibson
3
lady_bird
3
  • Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881555

    Lately I’ve become more aware of Frances McDormand’s win for Three Billboards getting a lot of criticism on here and the only reason that I can gather for it so far is that people preferred her competition. I don’t know if it’s residual bad feelings from last season that are still hanging around or just anger that nobody else had a chance of winning? Personally I can acknowledge Three Billboards wasn’t a perfect film but McDormand gave an incredibly raw and powerful performance that was even more deserving then her win for Fargo. I understand that everybody has different opinions that are subjective but to see McDormand’s win being being portrayed as a substandard winner is really odd to me as she was more then deserving on merit alone even if you preferred her competition. What do you think? Am I wrong? Did you like her performance but didn’t think she should have won? Was she your personal choice last year? Where would you rank her in this decade’s Best Actress winners so far?

    Reply
    Pulp
    Participant
    Joined:
    Feb 13th, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881598

    I don’t think it’s a bad performance but really nothing special, I definitely wouldn’t have nominated her. It’s weird that they gave her a 2nd Oscar for just a decent performance in fairly mediocre film when Hawkins, Robbie and to a lesser extent Ronan all gave incredible and unique performances and haven’t won yet. And she didn’t just win the Oscar she swept the entire season which I’m sure makes it worse for a lot of people.

    ReplyCopy URL
    JGibson
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jul 8th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881614

    It could be cause it’s a second oscar for her in relatively short time so many people see as if she didn’t “need” it and her category had 3 other oscarless contenders that could easily win with that roles in any other year.
    Also, I see some people don’t take her performance too seriously because it seems she’s just playing another angry woman again (like in Olive Kitteridge) and that’s too close to her personality in real life. Guess that’s a problem character actors have to carry even though they give incredible nuance to each performance (like olivia colman).

    I have to comment how unusual but also timely her win is. She headed to the first Oscar post-Me Too and Weinstein-less that famously favoured ingenue or hot young actresses in a breakout performance. Something Margot Robbie and Saoirse Ronan would have benefited. And she won when that kind of system broke. Following to this year when the winner was a comedic over 40 character actress that would also never get a chance few years ago. I’m curious to see if Best Actress will have a trend on this new wave.

    But on her win itself: I think it’s deserving as she impersonated a complex and difficult character and somehow brought charm and sympath out of her grumpyness that only Frances can do. She’s one of my favorite actress and love everything she’s around. But I have to say, despite all of this, Sally Hawkins would still have my vote cause that lady acted her ass of in TSOW and glowed in every single scene. I find it sad for poor sis cause she was no Robbie/Ronan type of young actress that gets plenty of offers cause she’s old for that but she’s also not a famous and popular among peers experienced actress like McDormand or Streep (both who also get plenty of roles despite their age in a ageist industry).
    So it was difficult to find a narrative for Sally besides her performance was great (which should be enough). Maybe in a year like the one Brie Larson or Julianne Moore won would be her chance, if you watch the Golden Globes when they were announcing the nominees for Drama actress you could see how nervous she was and Octavia Spencer was rubbing her back to calm her down. That kind of broke my heart how she went silent during the whole season cause a sweep happened.

    ReplyCopy URL
    montana82
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 14th, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881616

    Most people hate 2nd wins that while fine didn’t warrant a 2nd Oscar when there were so many deserving non winners they were up against.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881803

    It was twenty one years since her last win- that is quite a period considering how long most two time Best Actress winners wait. I felt bad for Hawkins too who would have been very deserving. It’s a shame she couldn’t even win the BAFTA as I thought they might honor there since she is overdue. I hope she gets to win soon.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Joe Burns
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 26th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881813

    Most people hate 2nd wins that while fine didn’t warrant a 2nd Oscar when there were so many deserving non winners they were up against.

    To me her performance was more then deserving even though I felt Hawkins was fantastic. I didn’t think her win was like Hilary Swank’s second win which was definitely a very easy choice in a relatively strong year(although it isn’t as strong as some like to make it out to be) where they could have endorsed Staunton or Winslet.

    ReplyCopy URL
    JackO
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jun 2nd, 2011
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881862

    Because the movie was awful and there were more deserving performances. She swept! It was awful.

    ReplyCopy URL
    deaetee
    Participant
    Joined:
    Sep 19th, 2018
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202881996

    I don’t necessarily hate her win, but definitely wasn’t my favourite. Sally Hawkins gave a better performance and she should have won.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Brayden Fitzsimmons
    Participant
    Joined:
    May 3rd, 2015
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882029

    It was twenty one years since her last win- that is quite a period considering how long most two time Best Actress winners wait. I felt bad for Hawkins too who would have been very deserving. It’s a shame she couldn’t even win the BAFTA as I thought they might honor there since she is overdue. I hope she gets to win soon.

    This

    If you look at the history of in double wins for Best Actress, you’ll begin to notice that there’s a phase of “you really like me” with the academy, that they will award you multiple times within a short period (3 to 12 years, the average being 10 years).

    Katherine Hepburn – 32 years (35, 67)
    Meryl Streep – 29 years (82, 11)
    Frances McDormand – 21 years (95, 17)
    Katherine Hepburn – 13 years (68, 81)

    Ingrid Bergman – 12 years (44, 56)
    Viven Leigh – 12 years (39, 51)
    Elizabeth Taylor – 8 years (60, 68)
    Jane Fonda – 7 years (71, 78)
    Sally Field – 5 years (79, 84)
    Hillary Swank – 5 years (99, 04)
    Glenda Jackson – 3 years (70, 73)
    Olivia de Haviland – 3 years (46, 49)
    Bette Davis – 3 years (35, 38)
    Louise Rainer – 1 year (36, 37)
    Katherine Hepburn – 1 year (67, 68)

    The first three is really interesting since Meryl’s 2nd win in lead was 29 years after her first lead and part of her win was because of how overdue she was considered. Katherine’s fourth win was because everybody loved her and thought both she and Henry Fonda were about to die (Henry did, she lived for another 20 years).

    Outside of Streep in 2011, the only time an actress won twice more than twenty years apart were Hepburn’s 2nd & McDormand and they were both in arguably their year’s runner up in best picture.

    There’s also only been two instances where someone won lead first then a supporting later

    Outside of Hepburn McDormand & Streep, the average length of time between Best Actress second wins is 4.2 years.

    Maggie Smith – 9 years (69 lead, 78 sup)
    Ingrid Bergman – 18 years (44 & 56 lead, 74 sup)

    Also an interesting stat is that there’s only three times an actress won supporting first then a lead

    Meryl Streep (78 sup, 82 & 11 lead)
    Jessica Lange (82 sup, 94 lead)
    Cate Blanchett (04 sup, 13 lead)

    With Meryl in 82 & Cate in 13, both of them were seen undeniable all timers & Lange won as a makeup for Frances in 82 and being in arguably the worst actress line up ever.

    ReplyCopy URL
    M: The Original
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 5th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882070

    McDormand’s 2nd win disappoints more so than angers. People prefer her competition. And like the last time she won Best Actress, her rivals were formidable.

    ReplyCopy URL
    M: The Original
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 5th, 2014
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882088

    There’s also only been two instances where someone won lead first then a supporting later

    Outside of Hepburn McDormand & Streep, the average length of time between Best Actress second wins is 4.2 years.

    Maggie Smith – 9 years (69 lead, 78 sup)
    Ingrid Bergman – 18 years (44 & 56 lead, 74 sup)

    You forgot Helen Hayes.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Miles
    Participant
    Joined:
    Oct 22nd, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882097

    I don’t hate her win. I just think she was 4th best by far and am disappointed that she swept.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Luca
    Keymaster
    Joined:
    Jun 23rd, 2017
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882169

    She was amazing in Three Billboards, but it wasn’t anything we hadn’t seen from her IMO. I thought Margot Robbie gave the best performance in that category; she was of course helped by the fact that we had never seen her do something like that before. I watched all the nominees after the Oscars, because I didn’t have time until then, and I found McDormand’s turn slightly overrated. Robbie should more range in I, Tonya than McDormand did in Three Billboards IMO.

     

    ReplyCopy URL
    Hoster1
    Participant
    Joined:
    Aug 8th, 2016
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882232

    To me:
    1. I don’t think she was even close to deserving when she won for Fargo (I’m aware this opinion is unpopular), so giving her a second Oscar, when she as always moves in her limited range is unecessary, even tough it’s a very good perfomance.
    2. I think Hawkins, Ronan and Streep were better.
    3. That sweep was an overkill. By the Critic’s Predictions awards I was rolling my eyes at those acting winners.

    ReplyCopy URL
    Zooey the Dreamer
    Participant
    Joined:
    Jan 12th, 2012
    Topics:
    Posts:
    #1202882322

    It’s the typical Frances McDormand performance. I don’t see much range. Not to mention that there isn’t much of a character arc and what we’re left with is McDormand’s stone face and her mannerisms. But I felt really alone back in 2018 when everybody was in love with her.

    Hawkins deserved this, with Streep not far behind. I didn’t get the love for Ronan, even though I enjoyed the film (and Metcalf’s loss is a crime!).

    ReplyCopy URL
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 67 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Similar Topics
darthva... - Jul 21, 2019
Movies
Hammad ... - Jul 21, 2019
Movies
Rachel - Jul 19, 2019
Movies