The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1940

About the field: Although I thought that it was going to be very strong, it was actually quite weak, with only one truly outstanding performance (no surprise who I guess) and it was very easy to do this ranking. For me everything was so obvious about whom I liked and how much. Except for my #1 and #2 my feelings are leaning towards neutral. However this year was still better than 1998 (though then there were two unforgettable performances). We saw in 1940 a scared woman, a socialite, a killer wife and two confused girl. The overall quality of the movies was also very low, yet I enjoyed doing this year as it's so often talked about (IMO yes). So my ranking for this year is:

5. Martha Scott in Our Town

Yet, her lack of presence effects my opinion about her unfortunately. Her whole performance fails to become substantial or really impressive. It's true that she shines sometimes, but it was way not enough to have a lasting impression on someone. This performance is not much. I'm a bit sorry as this could have been so much more.

4. Bette Davis in The Letter
Overall it's not bad, however it's very inconsistent and uneven in its strenght. Here however, Davis also had to work with a mediocore material. Too bad as this is probably the only performance of Bette I was disappointed by.

3. Ginger Rogers in Kitty Foyle
I can say that she gave a very strong and memorable performance. She is truly great but I simply cannot overcome the fact that she's so uneven. A performance that could have been so great, but was damaged by the quality of the movie.

2. Katharine Hepburn in The Philadelphia Story
this is a very nice and entertaining performance, which may not be that deep, however it succeeds in pleasing the audience and most of all, in being funny and amusing. It's probably not the best performance of Kate Hepburn, but not her worst either. Great fun and nice entertainment.

1. Joan Fontaine in Rebecca
Such an obivous (and delightful) pick. She holds it together with her charm, beauty and immense talent and also, I don't really think that anyone could have played this character this well with such credibility. Fontaine definitely deserves the huge amount of love she gets for this performance. Viva Joan!

So my winner for this year is (by a landslide)...
Joan Fontaine in Rebecca
Hey Judith! Don't be pissed that Joan won and you didn't!

Bad news everyone: I'll be away until August so no blog entries until then. However I've already picked my next year and I have good news: all movies are online so we'll be able to discuss and (re-)watch them together. Naturally, I give you clues, which one it will be. These clues will be very easy, but let's see:

• People hearing without listening... Or the contrary?
• She's on fire... (sorry)
• Speaking. Oh sorry...
• NO-Way

And time to announce another winner of the prediction contest: Joe Burns, congratulations!

So what do you think? Guesses, opinions anyone?

P.S.: I would like to make my conscience clear, so that's why I made a bit of change here. I don't want to really explain it and I may regret this one too, but I was not satisfied with the original. First I thought that my doubt would disappear, but it did not unfortunately. I know that this is not fair, but I don't make excuses. So that's just how I feel.

Ginger Rogers in Kitty Foyle: The Natural History of a Woman

Superstar Ginger Rogers received her only Best Actress nomination and win for playing Kitty Foyle, a confused white-collar woman mixed up in a relationship with a rich man in the Best Picture nominated movie, Kitty Foyle: The Natural History of a Woman. It's sooooo easy to see why Rogers won the Oscar for this role: she had a very baity role (playing against the type) in a melodrama, she was a huge star and yet Oscarless. This is probably the best combination to win an Oscar. I'm not sure though if she was the front-runner, I think it might have been between Bette Davis and Katharine Hepburn, but tell me if I'm wrong.

Kitty Foyle is a bit cheap soap opera, which has its good moments, but overall it's weak, predictable and soappy. OK, I do not have much affection for 1940s melodramas, but even the wildest fans of the genre can admit that there have been much better movies than this one. There's nothing worth mentioning about it: mediocore screenplay, directing and actors. It's so much like To Each His Own, the mediocore movie, where the leading actress can shine her way to the Oscar podium. So it's not really a movie which is worth watching and sometimes it caused me suffering.

However, Ginger Rogers (miraculously) was able to give a very decent and strong performance as Kitty, the strong and fighting working girl, though I must say that her performance was a bit uneven. It started a bit weak (also the screenplay's fault) but after all I warmed up to it and in the end she truly impressed me. This win of Rogers is one of the least popular ones: if we talk about this year (or you watch polls), people almost never pick her for the win, all supporting Davis, Hepburn or Fontaine.

As I said, the beginning is rather weak and it does not have much weight. I felt it was too standard and usual, which I really dislike as even being bad has some originality. However, I must mention the 80% of it is the screenplay's fault since it does not give anything special to Rogers. You have to be VERY talented to be special with a bad book and unfortunately Rogers was a bit limited performer.

Somehow I felt that the poor quality of the movie had a bad effect on Rogers' overall performance. You cannot build a palace of only water, if you know what I mean. And yet, somehow Rogers found the perfect balance and was able to elevate the material to become something tolerable. Somewhere towards the scenes where she finds true love I felt that Rogers found herself too in this role and she was able to deliver a brilliant performance.

She handles the cheesy and sentimental story with so much seriousness as if it was Shakespeare and this was a perfect decision. She made Kitty a breathing, loving and most of all living human being. She became really natural and the star suddenly disappeared and I saw an actress. Her charm and talent shined through the movie and made me want to see more of her. And there's a great factor because of which she was able to imporve her performance: the screentime. She's onscreen for 90% of the movie, actually there are no scenes not involving her and fortunately she was able to live with all the opportunites of this. The character development was extraordinary as I could witness that Kitty became a mature woman, who went through a lot of bad things andyet she never gave up.

The hospital scene (I know I'm a great sucker for these ones) is simply amazing and is the higlight of her whole performance. Her despair and sadness is almost heartbreaking to watch and she avoided over-the-topness excellently, she was never too much and she achieved so much effect with subtlety. It really had some emotional weight and I was most greatful for that when I was watching this poor movie.

I have a big problem with the rating: she was a 2.5 at the beginning, a 3.5-4 in the middle and a very strong 4.5 at the end of the movie. Overall I can say that she gave a very strong and memorable performance and I was convinced about a rating at the beginning but now I've become uncertain. She is truly great but I simply cannot overcome the fact that she's so uneven. A performance that could have been so great, but was damaged by the quality of the movie. Too bad. I guess I'm using mathematics.







So comments anyone? The Final Conclusion is soon to come! To watch Kitty Foyle, click here.

Martha Scott in Our Town

Martha Scott received her only Best Actress nomination of her carreer for playing Emily Webb, a bright, naive small town girl in the Best Picture nominated movie, Our Town. And by this she became one of those very few people who got nominations for their raved performances and then achieved nothing that lived up to the success of the first movie (if we count playing Ben-Hur's mother and appearing in Murder, She Wrote and Dallas as a success than it's not true for her). She reprised her Broadway role on screen just like Katharine Hepburn did in The Philadelphia story, so this role involved many traps.

Our Town is a good little movie based on the play of Thornton Wilder, whom I really respect and admire (if you haven't read The Bridge of San Luis Rey I recommend checking out). Because of him, I had high expectations, but then I did not hear many good things about this film, so I decided to watch it without thinking anything. The great actors in this movie give very decent, yet forgettable performances. William Holden goes quite over-the-top with his character, which is full of mannerisms and it's nothing interesting. I would have also expected more of Thomas Mitchell and Fay Bainter but they did not give me that much either. However, after watching the movie, I really wanted to read the play.

Martha Scott got a bit standard role as Emily, the naive girl living next door. She's a bit typical early 20th century girl, always being kind, helpful and naturally hard-working. She's a very bright young girl, who however feels very good in that small, insignificant town she lives in. The best thing about this performance is that (contrary to the movie), it never becomes theatrical and could use the opportunities of film. Also she was 28 at the time, much older than Emily, yet you can never feel that she's too old or miscast. However, I was quite dissatisfied with her performance and for a reason.

First of all, her very minimal screentime which makes her borderline supporting. At the beginning of the movie, she's barely on screen and when she's there, we are waiting for something, waiting, waiting and waiting. She's very much like her co-star William Holden in Stalag 17. First, the lack of screentime makes you excited and want to see her, but after a while you become bored and think that she will never really appear and right then she becomes the main character. I felt that she could do more, because she had the potential and the talent, she just simply did not have time to shine. In very few cases can a performer leave a lasting impression on you with such minimal time (Pat Neal and Simone Signoret come to my mind right now).

People mostly praise her last scenes (which I will mention later), I was however mostly impressed by the sequence where she goes on a date with William Holden. Right there she could truly shine and show how much innocence and love she can express with her face and eyes. In my opinion, William Holden did not get that scene right, however Scott was able to hold it together with her charm and loveliness. For me this was the highlight of her whole performance and the movie itself.

Our Town is a bit weird movie and yet there were some ideas I loved very much. In the wedding scene we could hear the thoughts of the people preparing. Scott's acting there was again excellent. In my opinion we could read everything from her very expressive face, you understand all of her emotions without even listening to what she says inside and this is quite an achievement.

And her big scenes towards the end are also very well-made, however I was not as impressed by her last monologue as I expected. I felt that it must have been very effective that time (it's typical 1940s acting there), but for me it was a bit cheesy and did not move me that much. She wanted to do so much and managed to do little. This is her biggest flaw, which is truly hers and not the screenplay's or the direction's (she was not the one in charge of her screentime).

Yet, her lack of presence effects my opinion about her unfortunately. Her whole performance fails to become substantial or really impressive. It's true that she shines sometimes, but it was way not enough to have a lasting impression on someone. I can't really say anything else, because this performance is not much. I'm a bit sorry as this could have been so much more. Nice, but not enough.


She's the definition of 3 Meryls.




So what do you think? It's time to give your final predictions! Risk and win! :)

Katharine Hepburn in The Philadelphia Story

Katharine Hepburn received her third Best Actress nomination for playing Tracy Samantha Lord, a rich society girl, who's preparing for her wedding with a boring loser, who cannot possibly replace her ex-husband, the charismatic C. K. Dexter Haven in the the George Cukor movie, the Philadelphia Story. Hepburn reached her superstar status with this movie, before this her movies always failed, but with The Philadelphia Story she finally pleased the audiences too. For her achievement she was honored with an Oscar nomination and in my opinion she was also very close to winning for she had already won the award of the New York Film Critics.

The Philadelphia Story is a classic comedy, which is in my opinion very entertaining and fun to watch. However, it's far from being as hysterical as The Awful Truth or My Man Godfrey or His Girl Friday (released in the same year). It's very solid entertainment with a solid directing, writing and acting performances. Cary Grant was said to be the star of the movie, despite the fact that he's barely on screen and he's rather supporting. James Stewart won Best Actor for his performance, which is very amusing (and I liked it much more this time), yet I don't feel that he deserved an Oscar for this.

The true star of the movie is however (as always when she's in something) Katharine Hepburn. I've already written about my feelings towards her in my review about her performance in Suddenly, Last Summer. The Philadelphia Story is quite different from that movie as this is the early Katharine Hepburn, however both share Hepburn's confidence, talent and shining self. The two roles cannot be more different, yet they have a lot in common.

Hepburn's Tracy Lord is one of those characters which you identify with the performer. This can be very dangerous in some of the cases, yet Hepburn was able to avoid all the traps of this character. We can feel that she gives herself and has fun with the role, yet it can be seen how much she worked on this character to make it perfect. She succeeded in a way, my only complaint could be the same I told about Doris Day. The comedy part is excellent and unforgettable, however the character often gets standard and there's no as much depth in it as I would have expected it.

Of course if you watch her for the first time, you're mostly amazed by the comedy of it, which is dead on. Her cheeky and bitchy one-liners are simply magnificently delivered by Katharine Hepburn and she managed to avoid overacting and exaggerating (which is a great problem of the performance of James Stewart). Hepburn is on the edge of it, yet she never gets over-the-top and unbelievable. She's very sober throughout the whole movie and she's not much (even in the drunk scenes).

Her chemistry with both Cary Grant and James Stewart is both brilliant. We cannot be sure until the very end if she goes with Stewart or Grant. Hepburn handles the romantic parts extremely well and yet never lets the movie become serious. Her extraordinary beauty shines through the thin material and lifts the whole movie. Without Katharine Hepburn, this movie would never have been a classic. She's the main reason why it's so entertaining and joyful.

And yet I have the problem of the entertaining surface but not much substance. Although I was having great fun, I did not get a lot out of her performance until a certain point. Probably my favorite scene involving her is the one where she says "I don't want to be worshiped. I want to be loved." All the motives of Tracy became clear to me with that scene. She's lonely, unloved and wants someone on whom she can rely with whom she can be happy forever. Naturally it's Cary Grant, but it's such an enjoyable to see her change from a sour and cheeky woman to a happy lady in love. She the ugly little duck becoming a beautiful swan.

Her comic delivery in the scene where she's told what to do, is simply hilarious. And although I'm not a huge fan of the so-called "screen-bitchery", she's so enjoyably bitchy in the first scenes with James Stewart and Ruth Hussey. Her comedy timing is probably the best in those scenes. I must also mention that although she had already played this part on Broadway, she never became theatrical in The Philadelphia Story, she perfectly portrayed this character on the screen too.

So to sum up, this is a very nice and entertaining performance, which may not be that deep, however it succeeds in pleasing the audience and most of all, in being funny and amusing. It's probably not the best performance of Kate Hepburn, but not her worst either. Great fun and nice entertainment.







Comments anyone?

Joan Fontaine in Rebecca

Joan Fontaine received her first (out of three) Best Actress nomination for playing a naive young girl marrying a rich widower in the Best Picture-winning Rebecca, the masterpiece of the legendary Sir Alfred Hitchcock. Fontaine became a huge star with this performance and exactly a year later, she won an Oscar, which is considered to be a make-up prize for losing for Rebecca. Neverthless both the movie and Fontaine's performance became classic and if it wasn't for Ginger Rogers' huge popoularity, she probably would have won.

As I said Rebecca is simply a masterpiece. It's full of suspense, mystery and excitement, plus you can never take your eyes off the screen. Hitchcock was a film master that's for sure and he showed his talent at filmmaking with this movie too, even though it's not as amazing as Vertigo or Rear Window. The actors all give strong and memorable performances and three of them got their nominations. Laurence Olivier is a bit mannered in the beginning if I may say so, but in the end, he's simply amazing. Judith Anderson is the most loved of the public, even though I feel she's a bit over-the-top, but great anyhow.

And about Joan Fontaine's performance: all I can say is WOW! I read somewhere that although Joan Fontaine and Laurence Olivier are great in this movie, they are both overshadowed by the creepy Judith Anderson. I would like to rephrase that sentence: although Laurence Olivier and Judith Anderson are great in this movie, they are both overshadowed by the magnificent Joan Fontaine. And it's all so true: every movement, every action of Fontaine is pitch-perfect and her presence is simply magnetic.

The amazing and shocking thing about this performance is that it's not showy or baity at all. Actually, it's such a subtle and (I even dare to say) thin role, that it's almost a miracle that Fontaine got so much out of it. In my opinion in 90% of the cases, actresses playing naive young girls are destined to be weak and not impressive at all. It's so great that Fontaine belongs to that 10% (thank God for that). It's such a lovely contradiction that she is enourmously strong by being weak and inconfident. From a standard character she created a living, breathing woman, for whom you root and want to succeed.

At the beginning we can only see a shy young girl watching Laurence Olivier. We can immediately feel her attraction towards him and the chemistry between is remarkable and rarely seen in other movies. Two other performances came to my mind about Joan Fontaine in Rebecca: Ingrid Bergman in Gaslight (this is more obvious) and Audrey Hepburn in The Nun's Story. Although she doesn't seem to be a mix between them (Fontaine's movie was made way before those ones), the common thing among them is their huge impact with subtle, minimal acting. They all haunted me for a long time and the effect of them is almost indescribable.

And yet this is not the best thing about her performance as it is the amazingly and carefully worked out development of her character. First, she's just a shy young girl, serving a horrible, nosy woman and falling for Maxim de Winter. Then at Manderley, she's an even more inconfident living in a world that is unknown and strange to her. We see her as a scared little animal parted from its mother. She is unforgettable in the scene where she says that Mrs. de Winter is dead and she doesn't realize that the man on the phone wanted to talk to her. That small sentence was probably the highlight of her whole performance (for me at least, I suspect that I might be the only one) and it is the reason why I love the Best Actress reviews. And as we approach the ending, this girl becomes so confident, that she's not even afraid to fight Mrs. Danvers (the way she says "I'm Mrs. de Winter now" is chilling). It's also worth mentioning, that her romantic moments with Laurence Olivier never become corny or soappy, they remain credible and of course full of tension.

Joan Fontaine's acting in this movie is so progressive, in my opinion way ahead of her time. Back in the 1940s it was all about drama queens and zany comedies, but Fontaine created something new, which effected the later film acting. I just cannot imagine other actresses in this kind of roles being that good, if it wasn't for the inspiration of Fontaine. I know that this is debatable and naturally it's just my opinion.

Her huge screentime is also an important factor of her whole performance. With that much time, she had the opportunity to go this deep into her character, though I must say that towards the end it's more about Laurence Olivier. We can agree that Fontaine's performance is the main reason why this movie is so great. She holds it together with her charm, beauty and immense talent and also, I don't really think that anyone could have played this character this well with such credibility. Fontaine definitely deserves the huge amount of love she gets for this performance. Personally, I even liked her in Suspicion. But that's a different story. Viva Joan!






Comments, opinions, predictions anyone? To watch Rebecca click here.

Bette Davis in The Letter

Motion Picture legend Bette Davis received her fifth/fourth (her first nomination was a write-in one) Best Actress nomination for playing Leslie Corbie, woman killing her lover in the William Wyler melodrama, The Letter. My first clue of this year (Who's the First Lady of movies?) referred to the constant argument if Bette is the one or Katharine Hepburn. I don't have to (or want to) decide the question here, however if we held a debate on who's the biggest drama queen, it would last for about 2 seconds as it's obviously Bette Davis. She starred as strong and yet vulnerable women in countless movies always giving performances that still amaze a lot of people (including myself).

The Letter is a very typical 1940s melodrama, which can be either a treat or a torture. This movie is a treat in the beginning, a torture in the middle and a semi-treat towards the end. William Wyler's directing style seems very dated today, even though he also made many classics (Mrs Miniver, The Best Years of Our Lives). The acting in this movie is the typical early overacting by the most of the cast and they add no real depth to the real character. James Stephenson got a Best Supporting Actor nom which might have been worthy, even though he's not THAT great in this movie.

All the actors got standard melodrama roles, including the great Bette. Unfortunately she does not get to be quite different from what she usually is. Her character lacks every originality, it seems as if the writers wanted to make it sure that the movie should be a success and that's why they gave something to Bette which she'd already done and was sure to be loved by the audience and the Academy. It just simply doesn't use the versatility of Bette Davis properly.

The performances of Bette Davis never disappointed me until now. Although I have to admit that she's far from being mediocore or bad in this movie, she simply did not give anything to me to rave about. This performance of hers has a massive fanbase, but I don't get it. Bette had many way better and more memorable performances than this one, say All about Eve, Jezebel or Now, Voyager. But it might be just me naturally.

Her first scene is the mostly praised above all, but the strength of that sequence is mostly due to the directing and the music, Bette actually doesn't do anything special, other than opening her eyes widely and being terrified. I mean, she shows all the emotions well, but in my humble opinion it was no big feat for Bette Davis. Also, there's also a constant weirdness about this character: she's so moody, gets teary so quickly, that it's so unreal and far from reality. I guess this is also due to the genre of the movie, however a bit of subtlety would not have hurt.

The short scenes at the prison are nothing special, she's just there and that's it. It's so unusual to see Bette not be as strong as she's in general. The big scene where the letter is shown to her was however solved by her very well. There I felt that it was Bette Davis and in fact showed how great she can be.

And yet her performance is not totally damaged by the weak material. Towards the ending, she becomes close to great and those are probably the strongest scenes of her whole achievement in this movie. I especially admired her in the scene where she (in fact) bends down in front of her lover's wife to get the letter. The fear and nervousness she shows, is simply amazing and probably saved her performance and the movie itself. All the emotions were displayed very well in those scenes and I was surely impressed.

I must also mention the very last scenes where she's confronted by her husband. She was also very strong and impressive there, if not brilliant. I think those scenes had the potential of being great, yet it did not live with all the opportunities, except for Davis who is very close to being amazing, you just simply cannot take your eyes off her. This is great to experience, but it also indicates how uneven her performance really is. It's never weak, I would not say that, but she was not constantly strong enough to grab my attention unfortunately.

I have to write down the same thing about Bette that I did with Elizabeth Taylor in Suddenly, Last Summer. Overall it's not bad, however it's very inconsistent and uneven in its strenght. Here however, Davis also had to work with a mediocore material (which was not true in Taylor's case). Too bad as this is probably the only performance of Bette I was disappointed by. The funny thing is though that right now I don't feel very disappointed, only neutral. She just (to quote the snobbish guy from the queue at the movie theatre in Annie Hall) did not hit me on a gut level, though Bette's craziest fans might want to hit me on a gut level right now.







To see The Letter click here.

So comments anyone? :)

The Next Year

Moving along with our next year, which is 1940 one of the most talked about races ever. The nominees cover a wide range, but now I stop talking. This time I will send links to the movies, which I hope will be useful to you (I cannot give you one to The Philadelphia Story but it's available on DVD I'm sure). Again, let's enjoy the movies and naturally, the performances of these iconic stars.



So the nominees were:

• Bette Davis in The Letter
• Joan Fontaine in Rebecca
• Katharine Hepburn in The Philadelphia Story
• Ginger Rogers in Kitty Foyle: The Natural History of a Woman
  
• Martha Scott in Our Town
  

So what are your predictions? It's time to share your fearless, gutsy predictions with me and the world.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1959

About the field: I can again say that I saw brilliant performances by brilliant actresses. This was the second time that my pick was 100% obvious for me as I think that she was way ahead of the competition, giving one of the best performances ever. However I saw four fantastic performances and a so-so one. I enjoyed their acting immensely and this was probably one of the most versatile years. A woman having an ugly nervous breakdown, a possessive mother, a single woman, a nun and an unhappy actress. And I must also mention that they starred in excellent movies, two of them even must-see ones. And this was also the first time that I previously saw all the movies (well, I saw The Nun's Story when I was 7 and I only remember being horrified that Audrey's hair was cut). So here's my ranking (which was the easiest to make so far besides 1998):

5. Elizabeth Taylor in Suddenly, Last Summer
This performance needed over-the-topness and Elizabeth Taylor, but I felt that it was way too much for me and sometimes she got quite annoying. I said some bad things but still it's not that bad, just a missed opportunity far from being a disaster or a tragedy. Nice work but not enough from Elizabeth Taylor.

4. Doris Day in Pillow Talk
Doris Day never lets her performance be serious, but she takes the comedy part of it more than seriously. She's always in charge of the character technically as her acting mostly technical and you can see how carefully worked on and excellently crafted her peformance realy is. One of the greatest comedy performances ever.

3. Simone Signoret in Room at the Top
Simone Signoret is one of the greatest actresses ever and in Room at the Top she was able to put on an amazing performance, which I liked much more for the first time, but it was still fantastic to watch as she gave a really strong and memorable performance. Magnificent work by an extraordinary talent.

2. Katharine Hepburn in Suddenly, Last Summer
I lined up a great deal of arguments why this is not one of Kate Hepburn's worst performances but is one of her best works ever. in which she deals with all the possible difficulties of a performance with such ease and brilliance that she nearly makes it too easy, which might be true for her, but not an ordinary performer. Gutwrenching work.

1. Audrey Hepburn in The Nun's Story
A revelation: Audrey Hepburn gently amazes you, her dignity and grace on screen leaves you speechless and makes you think about her for a long time. Haunting, effective work and an amazing accomplishment by a true legend at her finest and one of the greatest performances that I have ever seen in my life. A real onscreen miracle.

So I can proudly announce that my winner for 1959 is...
Audrey Hepburn in The Nun's Story
Truly unforgettable work by an amazing actress.

I will do another year, which I will finish until next Monday. It's going to be a bit fast, but I won't be able to write until August. But we have a year and naturally I give you clues to find out:

• Who's the First Lady of movies?
• You Rang, M'Lady?
• My, your, his, her...
• It's all about women...

I will reveal the secret tomorrow, but until then I'm waiting for your thoughts, opinions and guesses of course.

Doris Day in Pillow Talk

Actress/singer Doris Day received her only Best Actress nomination to date for playing Jan Marrow, an interior decorator falling for Rock Hudson in the comedy Pillow Talk. This nomination is very much debated on forums as Doris Day was nominated for her comedy performance, while Marilyn Monroe was snubbed for her work in Some Like It Hot. I think that it is not worth arguing about this as I think they were both nomination-worthy. I think Day was not favored to win, however I believe she received many votes for she was a huge star giving a great comedy performance.

Pillow Talk is a GENIOUS romantic comedy about... sex. I think it's very brave for it's time as it nearly openly discusses this subject which was considered immoral to talk about in movies. No wonder that the brilliant, hilarious and HYSTERICAL screenplay won the Best Original Screenplay Oscar (in fact, this is one of the most deserved wins in this category). The acting is top-class in Pillow Talk including the always amazing Rock Hudson giving a great comedy performance and the supporting cast: Tony Randall and Thelma Ritter are so insanely funny, I think both deserved to win a supporting Oscar (even though I did not use to appreciate Ritter in this).And yes, there's the always charming Doris Day who's simply excellent and almost pitch-perfect as a woman having "bedroom problems".

Comedy performances are extremely hard to judge. You have to turn off your snobism, but also your enthusiasm. They are easy to be loved, but easy to be disliked too. Actually, when comedy acting is great, it seems better than acting in a serious, heavy drama, let's just face it. So I remain very sober while reviewing Day, who left a huge impact on me with her acting.

I don't really know her work (besides this one), however I find her to be immensly talented and a magnificently shining personality (that's why she must have been very difficult to work with, I have a feeling). And this charm (and her sense of humor) always helps her a lot during the movie. She's a professional entertainer knowing exactly when and how to do things to make the audience laugh. She's always in charge of the character technically as her acting mostly technical and you can see how carefully worked on and excellently crafted her peformance realy is.

Her line-readings are quite simply hysterical and she's probably the only one of her generation who could deliver the silliest sentences this very funny way (e.g. "don't mind my mind"). When I saw her being that brilliant in this, Irene Dunne, Rosalind Russell and Jean Arthur came to my mind. Day (just like the previously mentioned ladies) kicks ass in these battle of sexes comedies. She's the cheeky, confident and yet charming girl living next door, who turns from the sour spinster to be a passionate woman.

Jan is a single woman and she says she likes it. We immediately know that naturally she doesn't, but Day never shows us the loneliness or isolation of her. She never lets her performance be serious, but she takes the comedy part of it more than seriously. Comedy is very hard to do as you need very much discipline and a skill of timing. Day's timing is more than wonderful: her lines blow up like fireworks and you just can't help bursting out in laughing.

Although she does not have the best jokes she gets the most out of her material. Her crying scene is the best part of her performance and it's really laugh-out-loud funny. Nobody (except for Jean Arthur) can cause as much laughter with crying as Doris Day. That sequence is nearly divine and should be taught at acting classes (I hope it is).

This performance is unfortunately not without it's flaw. Although it's great that she never lets drama get into the movie, she sometimes overdid the mannerisms of this spinster character. It does not help either that sometimes she's outdone by her brilliant co-stars. Although these are not serious problems, they ruin the whole picture a bit unfortunately.

Nevertheless, this was probably, not probably, definitely the most enjoyable nominated performance of the five, however it had some minor flaws which did not damage her overall achievement, only cooled my enthusiasm. It's no big deal however to declare that right now I've just scene one of the greatest comedy performances ever. Excellent job.
What do you think?

Simone Signoret in Room at the Top

International star Simone Signoret received her first Best Actress nomination and a surprise win for playing Alice Aisgill, a lonely and bitter married actress, who begins an affair with a younger man in the movie Room at the Top. It's really a miracle that Signoret was able to win the Oscar for this performance. Not because she was bad, but Room at the top is a rather small British movie and also two of Hollywood's greatest stars were expected to win the coveted award. Eventually they both went home empty-handed, while Signoret won the award and got another nomination six years later.

Room at the Top is a good English free cinema movie, which I liked very much for the first time, but now I felt extremely bored sometimes, though there were things about this movie that I liked much more this time around. Also, the ending was not very satisfying. One of those things is the performance of Laurence Harvey, who in my opinion was superb, despite the things people say about his talent. In this movie, he rocks and probably even deserved the Oscar (though I'm not sure whether he gets my vote over Jack Lemmon's legendary performance, time will tell). Also there were things I was truly amazed last time, but now caused me minor disappointment.

If you don't understand the clues, I'll tell you. It was as much of a shock for me as it will be for you, but it was Simone Signoret. Last time I wrote a review about this movie I could not stop hailing Singoret's performance, but this time my love has cooled a bit. She's no longer in my Top 10, I'm afraid. I do NOT want to suggest though that she was bad or mediocore, I just felt that she was a bit underwhelming this time.

The part of Alice is not very baity, it has many opportunities to show Signoret's brilliance, but it's not the type of role that gets love from the Oscars. I can only compare her to Rachel Roberts in This Sporting Life: they become victims in the end and they are the characters you feel sorry for eventually. I must also say that just like in the case of Roberts, I cannot really imagine anyone play Alice with the passion and deep understanding which Signoret used in this movie. Sometimes I even identified Signoret with Alice.

Signoret was an actress with a unique and (I even dare to say) odd talent, whose presence is nearly magnetic and you cannot take your eyes off her. Her inner beauty and radiant personality shine through the movie so much, that you are instantly amazed by her and do not really care about the others onscreen. She does not steal the scenes, not at all, in fact she makes the scenes and everyone else pales in comparision with her. When she's there, it's her an nobody else. I also must mention that her weird accent in this movie adds so much mistery to this character about whom we don't know much, yet we feel everything she went through in her life, all the disappointments and all the hurtful moments.

Alice is an unhappy, lonely woman, who longs for a bit of happiness, which she finds on the side of a man much younger than her. Because of the way her husband treated her she became bitter and deeply devasted. Alice does not expect much from life, yet Signoret shows us how desperately she wants to find some joy in her life. The first time she meets Joe (the character Harvey play) we do not feel that anything's going to happen between them and their relationship begins from being friends eventually ending up being a fatal affair.

And once she finds happiness, Alice does everything possible to keep it. She never lets Joe treat her like her husband did, but we can easily see how vulnerable and unstable she is in fact. Because of Joe's greed, Alice has to lose everything, which meant happiness and comfort to Alice later. She has to be unhappy again and she's too weak and broken-down to put up with this state.

The scene where she says goodbye to Joe is almost heartbreaking: she (along with the audience) knows that it is the end of their relationship despite the fact that Joe always say "this is just the beginning". Alice breaks down and desperately wants to get her happiness back. What used to mean her whole life is gone in a second and she cannot accept it. Signoret brilliantly portrays this emotions on-screen and sometimes this much pain is unbearable to watch.

So to sum up, I think Simone Signoret is one of the greatest actresses ever and in Room at the Top she was able to put on an amazing performance, which I liked much more for the first time, but it was still fantastic to watch. A very unusually heartbreaking performance and now understand all the love and criticism it gets. But I can't really deny how fantastic she really is, so ironically, her original rating almost remained here. Magnificent work by an extraordinary talent.
So what do you think? This is the last opportunity to share your predictions with me, which I accept (you can still predict next time, but it would be to easy to find out then).

Audrey Hepburn in The Nun's Story

Motion picture legend Audrey Hepburn received her third Best Actress nomination for playing Gabrielle van der Mar, a young Belgian girl who decides to become a nun in order to help other people. She goes through the tough process of learning, and she helps at a mental institution before going to the Congo, where her life is changed forever. This is probably the most respected and appreciated performance of the legendary actress and at the time she also won many awards from critics. This is the type of performance for which stars could win at the time, but I guess the "she's already won" thing got in the way of Hepburn.

The Nun's Story is a moving, credible and in short excellent movie, which shows the life and sacrifices of nuns with dignity and respect. It's by no means a standard religious drama, so a non-religious person can also identify with the subject and in my opinion it's a great achievement. The movie features several Academy Award winning and nominated actors (although most of them were not nominated at the time), who give excellent and memorable supporting performances. I must give special mention to Dame Edith Evans, who was most definitely worthy of the Oscar nomination (and the win too in that weak year if you ask me). But it's also nice to see Beatrice Straight, Peter Finch (both won for Network 17 years later) and Peggy Ashcroft.

They all pale in comparision with Audrey Hepburn, who gives her ever-best performance in this movie. This role was tailor-made for her and I actually cannot really imagine anyone playing this role, as Hepburn is more Hepburn in this movie than ever, despite the fact that this is her most dramatic performance. Until right now I was one of those, who thought that Audrey Hepburn is mostly loved and appreciated because of her charm, but The Nun's Story was like a revelation to me: yes, Audrey Hepburn had enourmous talent, a one-of-a-kind screen presence and a nearly angelic personality. This role had to come in her way, it was destiny.

We can see even in the first scenes what we will get from her. Her whole performance is in that scene: she's quiet, doesn't say much with words, she expresses her feelings with her face and yes, her beauty. It's almost unbearable to see her say goodbye to her previous life as her actions and reactions are so heartbreakingly real, her doubts and insecurities are so well presented even in the beginning.

Her changes during the learning process are extremely impressive and again prove Hepburn's immense talent. Again we see the doubts of this inexperienced girl, who tries to overcome her weakness in order to sacrifice her whole life to God. She wants to make this commitment, but we also feel how inconfident she really is.

When she prepares for her trip to the Congo, her subtle excitement and enthusiasm we feel is almost unspeakable. Even then she has to deal with a moral dilemma and again she's full of doubt and inconfidence. At the mental asylum we get to know a new face of this girl: young, inconfident, unprepared and scared. Her true fear, when a scizophrenic woman attacks her is almost again unbearably real. She shows the human side of this character and we also see how much she has to learn to become a good nun.

Probably the most dangerous part of her role comes with the Congo part, where her character works as a nurse with the doctor played by Peter Finch. We don't get the standard nun performance, with the lovely and yet strict personality. We actually realize the hardships of this lifestyle. They also have doubts and fears like all of us, after all they are also people. This seems very harsh, but the human side of nuns is rarely shown in movies. And the scenes where she tries to defeat her attraction towards the doctor is an excellent proof. She fears from the consequences and cannot get close to any man. In a scene where she's praying she says that the more she tries to be perfect the more imperfect she becomes, that's probably the most brilliantly acted moments in the motion picture history (but praying scenes can alsways have a great effect on the audience.

Although Hepburn does well with the technical part, her performance completely relies on emotions while acting. She has an effect on you which cannot be got across, you can only feel her brilliance with your soul. This sounds quite corny I know, but it cannot be more true about Audrey in this movie. She gently amazes you, her dignity and grace on screen leaves you speechless and makes you think about her for a long time. Haunting, effective work and an amazing accomplishment by a true legend at her finest.






If you'd like to see The Nun's Story click here. Also to see Suddenly, Last Summer click here. So what do you think? Tell me in your comments (also your predictions).

Elizabeth Taylor in Suddenly, Last Summer

Legendary Elizabeth Taylor received her third Oscar nomination in a row for playing Catherine, a mentally unstable young woman in the 1959 movie, Suddenly, Last Summer alongside Kate Hepburn and her good friend Montgomery Clift. Liz was favored to win her first Oscar for this performance (with her friend Audrey Hepburn as her biggest rival), however she lost the Oscar in a huge upset. She got her makeup award a year later though (for a movie that was not only hated by the critics but also by Liz herself)

I'm not going to go into the details of the movie again as I've already done that. I just have to tell how dangerous the part of Catharine really is. It's really difficult and one can extremely easily can go very-very over-the-top with it. This danger gets even more terrifying if we consider the fact that Elizabeth Taylor is playing Catharine. Taylor is a brilliant and talented performer which she proved many times (Virginia Woolf naturally) and whom I love immensely and without conditions, but she can/could very easily get hysterical and way too over-the-top (BUtterfield 8) with her roles and then she becomes so annoying that you want to slap her.

Good news to both the fans and the haters: here she's (quite frankly put) both. For the first time around, I was mesmerized by her performance (mainly because of her last scene), but now I looked at her performance very carefully from a safe distance. And I can safely say, that I liked it (in a way) again as she gives a memorable performance, which is not for the ages probably, but not bad either.

In her very first scene, I was so afraid that I was going to see the hysterical, over-the-top Liz, but my fears became less intense towards the end of it (it should not have unfortunately). Yet, as much as I want to, I cannot really say many bad things about her performance. The first thing is that she portrays Catharine as a very seductive woman in some of the scenes, which I did not really get. I think Catharine is scared of everyone and everything, including the doctor who tries to help her and I also felt that it was very illogical that she seduced him (and kissing him). Sometimes Taylor used the wrong emotions and I cannot say another term for her acting, rather than moody and unpredictable.

Being unpredictable is not essentially a problem, but here I felt a bit annoyed by it. The big Oscary scenes, the loud cries and screams of her character turned out to be a bit funny in the end. And it's a huge problem if you want to shock, but end up being a bit ridiculous. Also, the tone of her voice could get really exaggerated sometimes, which again annoyed me. Where she hugs and kisses Montgomery Clift and says that she's very lonely is the most flawed of all. I definitely think that Taylor could have done much-much better for she has the potential of being amazing (again the example is Virginia Woolf), she just missed so many opportunities with this movie. Not to mention that she's overshadowed by Kate Hepburn so much, that it's almost a sin (though everyone pales in comparision with her, so it's a bit unfair from me).

I have to admit though, that her big scene is dead on and is probably the reason that I tend to be forgiving of all her flaws and mistakes. It's so full of emotions and it's probably the only scene where I could really understand the over-the-top nature of the performance. It was essential for that scene, if she had been subtle, she would have sucked and would not have had a huge impact on the audience.

So, to sum up I can say that this performance needed over-the-topness and Elizabeth Taylor, but I felt that it was way to much for me and sometimes she got quite annoying. I said some bad things but still it's not that bad, just a missed opportunity far from being a disaster or a tragedy. Nice work but not enough from Elizabeth Taylor.

So what do you think? Did you like Elizabeth Taylor?

Katharine Hepburn in Suddenly, Last Summer

Katharine Hepburn received her eighth Best Actress nomination for playing Mrs. Violet Venable in the psycho-drama based on the play of Tennesse Williams, Suddenly, Last Summer. I am 100% positive that Hepburn did not have much chance to win the Oscar (maybe her name helped her a bit) as her co-star, hot superstar Elizabeth Taylor was favored to win the award. They both lost however to French actress Simone Signoret.

Suddenly, Last Summer is an impressive and sometimes even shocking movie, talking about the difficult (and sore) subject of lobotomy in a very brave and innovative way, even though the homosexual subtexts of the original play were obviously deleted and censored (which were in the original play). Montgomery Clift has the most screentime of the actors I think, yet he seems to be more supporting than leading. I am going to talk about Liz Taylor's performance later so I won't spoil the suspense until than. I liked Mercedes McCamridge the first time I watched this movie, but this time I found her to be incredibly annoying (but great in the last scene). Nevertheless, I cannot complain about the great and always masterful direction of Mr. Joseph L. Mankiewicz, who had already made many masterpieces.

Katharine Hepburn is a loved and respected personality, who's widely considered to be the greatest American actress ever lived (though some give the title to Bette Davis, but let's not argue about that). I used to think that Hepburn was extremely overrated, which I don't like to admit, but I do right now. It's true that she has certain mannerisms that one has to get used to. (and this is probably the performance that made me love her) .

On an imdb board (oh, I hate them) I read that this was Hepburn's worst performance of her career. I would like to reject that right now and explain why. Lots of people also argue that her performance is supporting instead of leading, which I again refuse to accept, even though there might be some truth in it. In my opinion she completely commands the screen and by the way she does not have much less screentime than her co-star Elizabeth Taylor, her time is just not divided into little sequences, but mostly into a 25-minute-long first scene, in which she deals with all the possible difficulties of a performance with such ease and brilliance that she nearly makes it too easy, which might be true for her, but not an ordinary performer.

The material of Tennesse Williams helps a LOT to his actors (brilliant roles all) and they are parts for middle-aged actresses to kill for. Those teary-eyed monologues are could have been over-the-top and annoying, but Hepburn here did not make the same mistake she did in Guess Who's Coming to Dinner in 1967. She soberly solves the problems avoids all the traps of the scenes, and her presence is not only magnetic, but also hypnotizing and strange. With her you never know, what's real and what's not, she shows the (not so inner) manipulative nature of this character so thrillingly well, that in the beginning, we believe everything she says (of course until we see the tortured Elizabeth Taylor).

Mrs. Venable is a tricky character. Although she's far from being moody, she gets so unpredictable and manipulative, yet in a strange way, she's someone you feel sorry for as she's the oone having real mental problems. Towards the end of her big scene (and the movie) we get to see the madness of this woman. At first she seems to be in deep grief over the loss of her only son, but we get to see how unstable and neurotic she really is. She does not only love or admire her son, there's some incestous attraction she feels for him. She's almost a maniac of the good reputation of her son, for which she's even able to destroy that innocent and also mentally unstable girl (She also blames her for the ultimate death of Sebastian).

Her scene at the mental institution towards the middle of the movie is top-class and nearly mind-blowing. Her refusal to accept that nothing happened in the reality how she tries to prove is unbelievably real and also (again manipulative). Unlike Angela Lansbury's character in The Manchurian Candidate (I think it's not that great of a cmoparision but still), she's not vicious, but desperate, inconcolable and bitter. And we must not forget her very last scene which I don't want to give away. I just say that it's breathtaking and unforgettable.

To sum up, I hope I lined up a great deal of arguments why this is not one of Kate Hepburn's worst performances but is one of her best works ever. Gutwrenching, masterful achievement of a towering talent and a movie legend.

P.S.: It is so ironic to give Meryls to Hepburn. LOL

So what do you think? Tell me I'm curious.

The Next Year

After a bit of rest after our previous, less talked about, but rich year, here's the next one, which is not ferquently mentioned either. But I can't help loving these years. When it's mentioned they mostly talk about the snub of Marilyn Monroe in Some Like It Hot. Nevertheless, we have five world-famous superstars starring in classic movies. Yes, it's 1959 (Fritz guessed correctly).

Again we should try watching the movies together (and except for Pillow Talk), I can help you with that in case you haven't seen them. So let's enjoy the performances and the movies together.

So the nominees were:

• Doris Day in Pillow Talk
  
• Audrey Hepburn in The Nun's Story
• Katharine Hepburn in Suddenly Last Summer
• Simone Signoret in Room at the Top*
• Elizabeth Taylor in Suddenly Last Summer

I am also waiting for your fearless predictions, but that's just natural. :)

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1963

About the field: three terrific and two weaker, but entertaining performances. These five actresses all impressed me to a degree, so I'm definitely shocked that this year is so rarely talked about. These performances are definitely worth watching and reviewing and I hope you watched the movies too, when you could. We saw five simple, working class women dealing with everyday problems: out-of-wedlock pregnancies (in three of the cases) or a violent man's love (in two cases). Despite the similar natures of the characters, the five ladies could not have been more diffenrent. This is actually a very exciting race, and each performance and movie was worth the time. A true pleasant surprise (which I expected a bit). The ranking was really difficult for me and only the #3 was obvious for me (and eventually #1). So here it is:

5. Shirley MacLaine in Irma La Douce
During the movie I was quite impressed and I liked her, but while I was writing the review I suddenly had complaints, doubts and I finished it sourly, struggling to go on. Too bad, as I wanted to love Shirley and I did in a way, it's her performance just lacked something which would have made it special. Still, she's very entertaining and sometimes even hilarious.

4.Natalie Wood in Love with the Proper Stranger
Wood's charm always helps her performance a great deal, because she's so beautiful and radiant, that you can never take you eyes off her. I liked her a lot during the movie, but found flaws in it when I was writing the review about it. I still appreciated it a lot and it certainly impressed me to a degree. But again it's not totally enough to totally satisfy me.

3.Rachel Roberts in This Sporting Life
Roberts is always in control of the character technically, although her performance mostly relies on the emotions and the impact on the audience. This is one of the most effective performances I've ever seen and the most brilliant (and smart) thing about is that you really don't recognize at first how tricky Roberts is with you, the viewer.Heartbreaking, natural, simple, unforgettable.

2. Patricia Neal in Hud

Neal uses her face and mostly her eyes to tell the story of Alma. Yes she speaks much, but she doesn't tell much with words, it's her facial expressions that let you inside her mind. I cannot really think about any performances like hers among actresses. She hits you hard with her subtlety like a bus, grab you and doesn't let you take your eyes off her.

1. Leslie Caron in The L-Shaped Room
This is not performance with a nice packing and absolutely no content in it (I can say numerous hailed performances lacking content), this is hundred per cent reality. Brutally real, brutally heartbreaking. One of the truly great achievemnents I've ever seen. This is Acting with capital A. The most subtle dynamite. Very few performers are able to achieve such greatness.

 

So I can proudly announce that my winner for 1963 is...
Leslie Caron

in

The L-Shaped Room

Yes, yes, Ms. Caron.

Also worth of a nomination that year: Ingrid Thulin in The Silence, Klári Tolnay in Skylark, Gunnel Lindblom in The Silence

So, our next year is also a secret that I will reveal tomorrow, but of course I can give you clues (now I give four).

• Comedy, why not?
• Blondies suck...
• Viva La France!
• Please don't get mad!

Natalie Wood in Love with the Proper Stranger

Popular, beloved actress Natalie Wood received her third and last Oscar nomination for playing Angie Rossini, a pregnant Italian-American girl, who has to deal with responsibility and the father of her unborn child (Steve McQueen) in the dramedy movie Love with the Proper Stranger. I am quite sure (just like in the case of Shirley MacLaine) that Wood received many votes from the Academy as she was Oscarless and a huge star (and was expected to win for Splendor in the Grass). It did not turn out to be enough for her to win the Oscar, which people do not complain much about, except for maybe her biggest fans.

Love with the Proper Stranger is a lovely and enjoyable little movie by Robert Mulligan which cannot live up to his previous masterpiece (To Kill the Mockingbird), but it's still very entertaining. It received five nominations altoghether, which were justified in my opinion. The actors give decent, but not too brilliant performances. Steve McQueen was a good actor, but he was not given that much to do in this movie and he's miscast in my opinion as he does not seem very Italian, if you know what I mean. However, I must mention the actor, who plays Columbo, the clumsy young man courting Natalie.

Natalie, beautiful Natalie. What can I say about her performance here? She could give heavy dramatic performances and there were occasions where she was terribly miscast (West Side Story ahhhem), but one cannot deny her radiant personality, her beauty and above all, her great acting talent. She moves with such ease and naturality in front of the camera, I think she was born to become a movie star. With the character of Angie, she made very wise decisions in my opinion. Although it doesn't have many opportunities, Wood really lifted the not very complicated material. At the beginning of the movie I did not like her performance as it mostly consisted of Italian-American stereotypes and mannerisms, but in time she got me with her warmth and naturality.

Wood shows the most vulnerable and miserable side of this character, her insecurity is so heartbreaking in the scenes where she considers abortion or the scene where she's getting undressed, but breaks down eventually. Those scenes gave me creeps and they were quite probably the highlights of Natalie's whole performance, which turned out to be more lightweight in the end, which is not a big problem to tell the truth, but you have to expect that heavy drama could only be found towards the middle of it, where all the insecurites of Angie are revealed. For those sequences it is definitely worth watching this movie.

It's interesting that this year, two actresses were nominated for playing single and pregnant young girls. Leslie Caron showed the dark side of the situation with her minimal and breathtaking acting, Natalie Wood did not go that deep into the character's mind. I know that it's not fair to compare them for it is also the screenplay's and the director's fault, still I believe that Wood's character should have been a little deeper and probably more complicated.

This whole thing does not mean though, that I wasn't utterly charmed. Wood's charm always helps her performance a great deal, because she's so beautiful and radiant, that you can never take you eyes off her. A brilliant example for that is when she's expecting Steve McQueen for dinner and watches herself in the mirror, being worried and by this she perfectly shows the excitement of the real first date.

Wood dealt with the comedy parts well, although she was did not do wonders with the material (like MacLaine for example). However, I must tell that she was not very convincing in the dinner scene with Columbo's family, where she's very clumsy and almost damages everything, burns herself and so on. I think it was needless and useless in for the movie. When she talks in the same scene about love, it's not solved perfectly either and is probably her weakest part of her performance.

To sum up, I saw a performance again that I liked a lot during the movie, but found flaws in it when I was writing the review about it. I still liked it a lot and it certainly impressed me to a degree. But again it's not totally enough to totally satisfy me. Something's missing.

So now I've finished the reviews and now I'm thinking the whole race over. Only one place is already decided in my ranking, I don't really know how to rank the others, but time (and me too) will tell. If your interested in Love with the Proper Stranger just click here. I am waiting for opinions and predictions in comments! :)

Rachel Roberts in This Sporting Life

British actress Rachel Roberts received her only Academy Award nomination for playing Mrs. Margaret Hammond, a widow having a stormy and tragic relationship with the aggressive and violant rugby player, Frank in This Sporting Life a movie directed by Lindsay Anderson. It's an interesting fact that her husband, Rex Harrison was also among the 1963 nominees in the Best Actor category. And they both went home empty handed, but I don't think that it was much of a shock as when performances like this won, it was always a huge upset (=Simone Signoret in Room at the Top).

This Sporting Life is a typical member of the depressing free cinema movies or as I like to call them, chimney movies. It's quite tragicand mostly raw and tough, however the direction of Lindsay Anderson is great (though it's not as fantastic as If...), the actors give very good and subtle performances even though only the two leads stand out to be honest. Richard Harris' acting is great, though it took me some time to like it or even get used to it (I don't know somehow I felt he was miming Marlon Brando a bit). Nevertheless, I feel he deserved the nomination, but not the win (at least not over Sidney Poitier).

And of course, there's Rachel Roberts. Nowdays, she's not frequently mentioned in discussions about movies in general, despite the fact that in my opinion she's one of the most underappreciated actresses. Her presence is very intense and raw, in my opinion she was born to play these disappointed wives having stormy affairs with violent men (just like in Saturday Night, Sunday Morning, check that one out). She caught the problems of these simple, working-class women with such sympathy and deep understanding, that is quite uncommon among actresses. I never actually felt that it was Rachel Roberts there, acting. I always saw a devastated, ashamed woman, terrified of what she and her life in general is becoming. She's always concerned about her reputation, pride and her children naturally.

The way Roberts captures the grief of this woman is truly outstanding and harrowing. She can never admit that her husband's death (always cleans his boots) was not pure accident and she cannot really live without him or with Frank either. She's doesn't know how to act and this uncertainty is truly heartwrenching to watch. Margaret is a very conventional and simple woman, but Roberts brilliantly shows that she dreams of something better and that she deserves a much better life. Her scene at the restaurant is simply marvellous: she does not know how to act, she's like a scared little animal, but she's simply heartbroken and deeply ashamed of Frank's behaviour. The way she says thank you to the waiter, nearly made me sob: it was so real, so natural and it felt so unforced. Only a real acting genious could do that.

Roberts is always in control of the character technically, although her performance mostly relies on the emotions and the impact on the audience. This is one of the most effective performances I've ever seen and the most brilliant (and smart) thing about is that you really don't recognize at first how tricky Roberts is with you, the viewer. I would not say that her presence is magnetic, because this is not that type of acting, she (just like Leslie Caron and Pat Neal) kills with her naturality and realism. Another perfect example is when she puts the Christmas presents into her children's stockings. Her kindness and love shines through the scene and it becomes nearly divine, which fills your sould with feelings that are hard to desribe.

I must also mention her breakdown scene towards the end, when she's confronted by the sheer, ugly truth about her husband in a very merciless way (led by the selfishness and anger of Frank). She's just unforgettable as she does not want to listen, only wants to hide from the world and get her husband back the only one who could make her happy.

Roberts also brilliantly shows how the relationship between her and Richard Harris becomes more intense and complicated. At first she's very hostile to him, but in the end she's just disgusted and terrified of him. When she leaves the restaurant, we know that everything is over.

So, finally I can say that this is the third fantastic performance of this bunch (in a row and it's so great), so it will be really tough to do that ranking in the end. Heartbreaking, natural, simple, unforgettable. Four words that perfectly describe Roberts' acting in This Sporting Life.
This time I can't give you a link unfortunately. But let's discuss in case you've seen this movie. I'm also waiting for some predictions. Tomorrow, I'll do Natalie Wood in the morning and the final conclusion in the evening or the following day.