Best Picture 1962

Okay, fuck it. Writing this after I have already watched them all and one of these is not like the other. Sing that to make it more effective. But not like they do in the film I am referencing. Oops, I spoiled the one I meant.

1962 Best Picture

Lawrence of Arabia

I mean, it's Lawrence of Arabia. Any casual movie fan has heard or seen or knows this film. They know both Peter O'Toole and Omar Sharif. They know the iconic score. They know the mind blowingly awesome scenes where O'Toole blows out a match only for it to be a sun rising. Sharif has one of the greatest introductions on film ever as he emerges from a mirage and then shoots another Bedouin and insults Peter O'Toole. This film has so many amazing and unbelievable moments in its almost four hours of run time. My beef with the film is that it is so long. There are so many shots that linger and most of them are of the establishing shot variety. The camera lingers too long on a pair riding on camels or of a sunset or on a train or whatever. Also, the film loses its steam because O'Toole's Lawrence loses his. The end has Lawrence questioning his actions and it honestly betrays his earlier persona. This needs so much investigation that Lawrence's life begs for a miniseries. It begs for a more nuanced and detailed look at his life, but O'Toole certainly does his best to make his Lawrence seem less mythical and more human. My point really is that towards the end we start to lose why we were so enamored with Lawrence in the first place. Understandable as his job and impact keeps going. Fantastic work from O'Toole and an iconic performance that is among the best ever. David Lean is the master of epic film making and the epic shots of the landscape are incredible. This is one of the best looking films ever and it has a great story to boot. They really don't make films like this anymore and probably never will. I fully understand why this film won Best Picture this year because of the difficulties in getting it made and finished. It is one of those brilliant pieces of film making that should be studied forever. Lawrence of Arabia is one of the best films ever made even with the few flaws.

The Longest Day

Wow! Why have I been sleeping on this one all this time? Honestly probably one of the greatest war films I have ever seen. It's up there with all the classics easily. This film shows the events before, during, and after the D-Day invasion. One of the best things about the film to me is that everyone speaks their own languages. Actual German actors speaking German. Actual French actors speaking French. British and Americans doing their thing. No annoying British person speaking English with a bad German accent. And the other cool thing is that all of the specific languages were filmed/directed by native directors, which I bet makes a difference most people don't even notice. The film has a ton of star power, mostly in cameos, but big names nonetheless. John Wayne, Henry Fonda, Richard Burton (taking refuge from filming Cleopatra), Rod Steiger, Sean Connery, Robert Mitchum, and my new guy Tom Tryon from The Cardinal, among many other recognizable names. But the film doesn't rely on them to move the action. The invasion does that easily on it's own and a lot of the actors we follow are no name guys so it makes it easier to connect to them. Another big thing I liked is that this is not some cartoon version of events. We see paratroopers getting killed in the air or jumping into burning buildings. There are realities of war shown that only don't go far enough because this is Hollywood in 1962. I'm sure if they could, there would have been some brutality like Saving Private Ryan. But there were still times I was saying Holy Shit! out loud to myself while watching. It's beautifully shot in black and white and the three hours went by incredibly fast it was so well paced. The major complaints I saw online were that it wasn't perfectly accurate, which of course not. It's a film in the early 60s that is telling a story to grip audiences. Of course there is going to be inaccuracies. The other complaint was about how some of the actors were much older than their real life counterparts. Which yeah, kinda sucks to see John Wayne at 54 playing a guy who was like 27, but I never for a moment felt that he didn't fit the character. I didn't think of him as young, just a grizzled vet and it works. Maybe this is how older vets felt about things, much how I feel watching modern military films where they can't even wear a uniform properly. But beyond all that it's a fantastic film in a year where there are upper echelon Oscar and film classics. In a weaker year this easily wins Best Picture. It could have won big in 1963 because it was so weak. Definitely one to watch if you like war films and even if you don't just to see what a day in hell looks like.

The Music Man

I gotta be honest. This is one of the most boring films I have encountered for this project. I do not say that lightly and I am sure that this statement upsets some fans of this film. Ok, whatever, but I have an expectation when it comes to a Best Picture nominated musical. For one, you can't be mind numbingly boring. Two, you have to have catchy songs (and no, I don't like Shipoopi). I can't remember a single song from this film besides the aforementioned one and I just watched it! I am a fan of Robert Preston, though, because he brings a huge amount of energy to the film and is the best part of this film. He's great, though his character is kinda shitty. It's a colorful film with decent sets and although I intensely dislike the songs, they have okay performances attached to them. But honestly, it is boring and I can try to come up with different platitudes or whatever but it's not happening. Maybe this is what happens when you use Iowa as your location for a musical The story is that Preston is a con man who goes from town to town pretending to be a band director and riles up the town to pay him for instruments and then he leaves without delivering. But the town librarian played by an Oscar winner from the year prior, Shirley Jones, falls in love with him after Preston helps her younger brother out, a young Ron Howard. Preston then gets called out by some guy from another town and a mob gets him, but they relent when the kids start playing instruments poorly. It sounds like it could be a pretty interesting musical but it just flat out wasn't. I think this is just one of those times where a film doesn't click at all with me. The only saving grace is Preston and thank God for him!

Mutiny on the Bounty

This is one of those films that has had a whole bunch of different versions throughout the years and has been an Oscar player for a couple of them. I feel like most people should know this story, but if not, it's about a mutiny on a ship called the Bounty. Wild, right? But for real, Captain Bligh is an overbearing ship captain who angers and upsets his crew with his callous punishments for even the smallest of things. The aristocratic Lieutenant Fletcher, Marlon Brando, leads the mutiny. It's not really a true to life version of events and is mostly dramatized, not that the actual events weren't dramatic enough. There's a lot of spectacle to the film. They built an almost exact replica of the Bounty (which crazily enough, I've been on and seen in person when it was docked in Florida for decades), so you get all these scenes on the ship that are cool to see. And then obviously you get the beautiful scenes in Tahiti where the ship stopped before the mutiny. Beautiful women shaking their hips and luscious scenery and deep blues from the ocean. The film looks great and is a good story overall with Trevor Howard as Bligh and one of my recent faves, Richard Harris, as one of the ship mates. The film itself was a box office bomb and apparently was hell to work on according to most of the cast and crew specifically because of Brando being a huge egotistical douche bag. That seems to be the big takeaway from this film which is it somehow got made despite Brando messing with every aspect from not working with the other actors, going off script, disappearing to other places during filming, to telling the writers and the director how to do their job. An utter mess that was a box office flop that somehow gets nominated for Best Picture was a harbinger for other films in this category for the rest of the 60s. I enjoyed the film and feel like most people will, but whether it is a legit Best Picture film, I'm not so sure. I feel like Billy Budd is almost a better film of this type from this same year. Doesn't really matter as this film was never going to win with the other amazing films in the category and at least it's not a bad, undeserving film.

To Kill A Mockingbird

This is one of those perfect films. Find a flaw because I sure can't. In almost any other year this would be sweeping the Oscars, yet it went up against some really great films including another all time classic. I am still undecided on which should win, but I feel like TKAM is the quintessential American film. Does it not dive deep enough into the small town racism and hatred and all that? Yeah, probably, but it for sure touches on the problems of black folks in rural Alabama with the limitations of a film in the 60s. The white savior angle that some trot out rings so hollow to me because Atticus Finch is simply doing what's right because it is what's right. Not because it makes him look better or because it's some trope. The film feels authentic and has such amazingly natural acting. I mostly despise child actors, yet I love Scout, Jem, and Dill. They are all fantastic in their roles and actually elevate the film for me. Gregory Peck delivers one of the greatest acting performances of all time that ranks up their with any actor and is legit a top Oscar moment. The film is mostly faithful to the book and while some characters are eliminated, it doesn't feel that the film lacks anything. It's one of those films that you sit down to watch and get completely engrossed in. I was impressed with how well the film is paced because I read that there were some scenes taken out that slowed the film down so that seems like a good decision. It flows so well and has a lot to say about not only small towns in the 30s but America in the 60s. Brock Peters, who plays Tom Robinson, is pretty great in his role as the accused black man and it warms my heart to know that both he and Peck became good life long friends and Peters delivered Peck's eulogy. Peck also was life long friends with Mary Badham and it just shows that Peck was a great man and the film had such a profound effect on those who made it and those who watched it. I also have to mention that this is Robert Duvall's film debut as Boo Radley and his introduction is one of the best in film. So tender and sweet and it just starts us down the amazing career that he had. To Kill A Mockingbird is one of the greatest books ever written, so naturally it makes sense that it has one of the greatest performances ever acted in one of the greatest films ever made. I love this film so much and if you haven't seen it, you are not of this earth.

 

Well, this is a pretty awesome group of BP nominees. The Music Man sucks. Hard. I'm sure there is some Inside Oscar stuff where someone gave money to voters to put it on the ballot or something. I dislike it and this may be that film I reference as worst when I do all my publicity interview when I'm done with the project (okay, I'm not that delusional). Mutiny on the Bounty is interesting because it was a box office flop and is still here. Either star power or peeps were again bribing people to vote for it. I enjoyed it, but apparently it was a mess and you'd think maybe that would prevent it from getting love, but here we are. I will have opportunity to compare the earlier one that got nominated, so I am excited for that. The Longest Day is fucking great. Totally surprised me. I love the  having Germans speak German and be directed by a German. Same for the French. It's just so authentic for an early 60s film. If made today, it would be amazing with what they could show. Just so good, but went up against Hall of Fame films, basically. To Kill a Mockingbird could be in the running for greatest American film of all time. I think it's perfect and is just simply a culmination of things going right. Lawrence of Arabia has been considered either the best British film of all time or has been in the top three. I looked it up and it makes sense. An epic that defies the lengthy run time to where you need to finish watching it if you ever catch it on TCM at 3:13pm and there are still 3 hours to go. I stick with the win instead of giving it to Atticus Finch. Both are equally great and should have tied.

Oscar Winner: Lawrence of Arabia
My Winner:  Lawrence of Arabia
To Kill a Mockingbird
The Longest Day
Mutiny on the Bounty
The Music Man

Leading Actor 1962

Pretty pissed off writing this right now. This category was all finished and I was just making some simple edits, but because Blogger sucks so much, it somehow deleted the whole thing even though I didn't select all and delete or anything. Just deleted the whole article somehow and now I have to write all of these again. So my heart probably won't be in this one and I don't think I can match what I previously wrote, which sucks because this is such an incredible year for Best Actors. Just look at the names and the films and you already know it's gonna be great. Alright, let's get this over with so I can move on.

1962 Best Actor

 

Gregory Peck - To Kill a Mockingbird

 

I mean, come on, if you haven't seen this performance and film are you even really alive? I'm pretty sure everyone was made to watch this in high school. I appreciated it back then and I appreciate it now even more. It gets thrown into the discussion as one of the greatest acting performances ever and I truly believe it belongs in that discussion. Peck obviously plays Atticus Finch, a Southern lawyer defending a black man accused of rape and makes sure he gets a fair trial the best that he can. Peck's performance is almost mythical. He is stately and composed and just the model of what it means to be a perfectly good human being. He's forthright in trying to get justice for his client, steadfast in his morals and defending the man despite the town trying to pressure and intimidate him into quitting, and so patient and warm when dealing with his kids. It's so easy to just be mesmerized by the performance because it captures the character from the book perfectly and lives up to that ideal. Peck is someone you want to know or want to be because he is so good and righteous without being overbearing. Peck embodies the character and pulls off creating this perfect character. Easily one of the best of all time.

Burt Lancaster - Birdman of Alcatraz

Honestly, this is probably the toughest one of these to rewrite for me. Months have gone by since I saw it and then wrote my review and I can't remember all the specific details and feelings about the performance exactly. I love some Burt Lancaster acting. He has such a unique style and way he delivers his lines, it's almost comforting in a weird way. He plays a guy in prison who starts raising some birds and becomes a top bird subject matter expert writing books and all that. But then he is moved to Alcatraz where he isn't allowed to raise birds. This character is rather complex and Lancaster does a great job of trying to add depth and balance the complexity at the same time. The real Birdman (no, not Michael Keaton), Robert Stroud, murdered a couple people and was pretty much a psychopath. The film tries to point out that prison can change folks for the better and contribute to society, but dude is still a murderer who happens to be smart and has time to devote solely to birds. I think Lancaster plays the character a little too lightly to how he actually was and creates something that doesn't feel authentic. It is still a good performance, but doesn't feel true to who he actually was. But if you can throw that aside and just look at the film and performance as it is, it ends up being pretty decent. I think the performance survives mostly because Lancaster was a movie star and watching him mess with some birds turns into interesting stuff because he is the one doing it, not because the script or film really earns it. I do feel like it is required viewing because it always seems to come up on lists or is just referenced a lot in other mediums. I dunno, I felt like I had heard about this film a ton before I actually watched it. Lancaster is fine, but it was never winning in this stacked year.

Jack Lemmon - Days of Wine and Roses

If you follow this blog at all, you know I am a huge Lemmon fan, mostly due to this project. I just love his style from his comedic chops to the more serious fare like this. I also love a good film about alcoholism, because I think it's so hard to portray accurately without delving into kitschy cliches. This is a great film and probably more of a hidden gem that most people have never heard of before. The film is about Lemmon who is an executive of some sort who hits on a receptionist at his company who flat out denies him at first. But then agrees to a drink, though she doesn't really drink and he picks one out that she likes. They become an item and get married and they also become increasingly codependent on each other and alcohol. The film is about how alcoholism can slowly show its ugly side after awhile and how two people can become so invested in drinking because of each other. Lemmon has his frenetic style still on display but we see a lot more seriousness to his acting. When the character goes through various ups and downs with alcohol and getting sober, we really see Lemmon shine as the story gets more intense. And that's why I love the film and performance because it really doesn't gloss over anything or trivialize the negative things about being drunk or in an affected codependent relationship. It also doesn't have a happy ending which seems so true to life because alcohol fucks everything up and doesn't always lead to a satisfying ending. Lemmon is really strong in this film and if this was a lesser year without two of the greatest performances of all time, this would absolutely be in the running for a win. I highly suggest watching this film and seeing Lemmon for yourself.

Marcello Mastroianni - Divorce, Italian Style

This is the last review I had for the year and was just editing some stuff in this review which is what led to the whole damn thing getting deleted, so I blame Mastroianni for this mess. This one is at least a bit more fresh in my mind, so at least not trying to remember specifics for a film I watched like five months ago (because I'm so bad at consistency with this blog sometimes). First off, this nomination is probably a reaction from the Academy after Mastroianni became an international superstar for La Dolce Vita. The Academy has always been late in rewarding their foreign nominees and also for latching on to certain actors and nominating them a couple times. This was the first of his three nominations and it's a very light, comedic role. The film is about a guy who is annoyed by his current wife (who is pretty hot despite the almost unibrow) and instead wants to marry his 16 year old cousin. That's obviously creepy, but apparently there was a law or rule that if you catch your spouse cheating you can kill them, essentially. That pretty wild to me, but I guess a religious country like Italy needed some loopholes. Anyway, that's what the film is about, Mastroianni tries to come up with a way to get his wife to cheat so he can off her and marry the kid. It's lighthearted and goofy a bit and Mastroianni uses physical comedy well and combines that with his movie star good looks for a decent performance. When you look at the other four in this category, this just stands out as the weakest, though not because it's bad or anything. Worth seeing and maybe pairing with Marriage, Italian Style from a couple years later.

Peter O'Toole - Lawrence of Arabia

 

Just like I said with Gregory Peck, you've probably seen this performance and film before. It's also considered one of the greatest acting performances ever, too, and absolutely belongs up there with Peck. O'Toole obviously is the eponymous Lawrence, a British officer who unites some Ottoman tribes to fight in WWII. That's the very brief description, but the film is an epic and follows O'Toole as he plays Lawrence during his exploits. O'Toole disappears into the character through all facets of the film. From the young British officer, to the grizzled desert fighter, to the disillusioned man questioning all of the violence. He is perfect in all these aspects of the character and honestly is the only person that I can see playing this man - just like Peck and Atticus Finch. There are so many iconic moments in this film and O'Toole features prominently in most of them. What I like the most is that Lawrence isn't just some badass guy all the way through. O'Toole imbues the character with so much depth and nuance that we see the ups and downs of the character. His relationship and chemistry with Omar Sharif is fantastic and probably the highlight of the film and performance, they have such give and take with each other. I went way more in depth on my first review of O'Toole, but really this is a great performance on screen that was a mess behind the scenes. It was a long, arduous shoot and apparently O'Toole and others would be drunk and possibly were drunk/hungover in some scenes. The fact that he delivered an all time performance with that going on, tells you how great of an actor he is. One of the best performances of all time, no doubt.

It's a really crazy good category full of some of the best performances ever and some really intense roles. Mastroianni is the odd man out and I'd love to see who would have taken the fifth spot if the Academy didn't vote him in. Lancaster tries to salvage a great performance despite a maybe weak film, or at least a film that ignores it's truth. But Lancaster is good in the role and can't hate him for that. Lemmon is so damn good in his role as the alcoholic who gets sober. Just really great dramatic work from him that should be watched. Then it becomes a toss up between O'Toole and Peck. Who do you like more? Because that's all it really is. Both are iconic, all time great acting performances. I like Peck more because he just feels like the perfect dad. While O'Toole is this crazy ass man leading Bedouins and changing history. Peck it is, both are great. Need more categories like this across the board, because damn, what a group.

Oscar Winner: Gregory Peck - To Kill a Mockingbird

My Winner: Gregory Peck - To Kill a Mockingbird

Peter O'Toole

Jack Lemmon

Burt Lancaster

Marcello Mastroianni

Leading Actress 1962

Wow, a bunch of heavy names I recognize here. Should be a really great year for this category, fingers crossed.

1962 Best Actress

Anne Bancroft - The Miracle Worker

This project has made me a big fan of Anne Bancroft and made me realize she is a legitimately great actress. I always just kinda knew her as Mrs. Robinson and the husband of Mel Brooks and that was the extent. But she is utterly fantastic in everything I have seen her in during this project. That's why I wanted to do this thing in the first place. Bancroft is one of the very few actors to win the triple crown of acting which is a Tony, Oscar, and Emmy. Not quite the EGOT, but very impressive regardless. Bancroft's second, yes second, Tony Award win was for playing this same role of Anne Sullivan on Broadway. It's honestly no surprise that she won the Oscar here because both her and Patty Duke have this great chemistry and you can tell they are comfortable in their roles. Bancroft is the teacher that helps Duke's Helen Keller come out of her shell by teaching her to communicate. It's a frustrating role to watch in a good way. Duke is combative and thrashes about for most of the film and you just kinda feel like she is never going to learn how to communicate. But then she does and it's a feel good moment. Bancroft up until that time is determined and stubborn and exhausted and exasperated and just plain focused on getting through to Helen. Everyone will point out the long food fight scene for good reason because there are only two words spoken the whole time yet so much is communicated between Bancroft and Duke in this scene. It's incredible acting and a true Oscar moment for both. I also like how Bancroft reminds me of Peter Sellers in Dr. Strangelove with the glasses she wears sometimes throughout the film. Not nearly as funny, though. It's just a strong performance for me. There are a lot of frustrations with what's going on because we want Helen to get it and for Anne to succeed and both actors suck you in to rooting for them. Bancroft is great in the role and she should be considering her pedigree with it, but also just enjoyable from an acting perspective.

Bette Davis - What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

Ah, Bette Davis. We will be seeing a lot of her eventually, but I feel like for a lot of people this is her most recognizable role. She plays the crazy Baby Jane Hudson, a washed up child star living with her crippled sister who was the bigger star in the family, played by Joan Crawford. Their actual real life feud is well documented, so its interesting to me that they would appear in the same film together, especially one like this. Davis goes full bore into the role. She created her own wild makeup look which has become somewhat iconic now. You can see her picture and know exactly who and what the film is without ever having seen it. This film also helped usher in the psycho biddy film genre where older actresses who were once prominent then terrorize those around them. I feel like all of this is because of how intensely Davis took this role and created something very memorable. I actually really like her acting style, too. It's almost as if this crazy woman wandered on set and just started reacting to those around her. Compare it to Crawford's style which still feels old school melodramatic and Davis stands out even more. It surprised me because I was expecting something more like Crawford and instead it's a performance that feels way more fresh and modern. The way she switches from being crazy and threatening to acting like an innocent child is kind of fun to watch. We are watching an actor just go for it and create something long lasting in the process and it's a joy to witness. A very good effort from Davis and we have about nine more reviews of hers to go, which I am excited about.

Katharine Hepburn - Long Day's Journey Into Night

Katharine Hepburn. She of the twelve nominations and four, four!, wins. She won her last three nominations in 1968, 1969, and 1982. I hated her 1982 win for On Golden Pond, completely undeserved. She was awesome in 1969 for The Lion in Winter and tied with Barbra Streisand, so maybe didn't deserve that one - up for debate. Have no clue why she won for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner in 1968. So basically maybe shouldn't have won her last three nominations and only had one win. As I travel back in time, I have more chances to see if/when Hepburn should have been rewarded. This film is a film adaptation of Eugene O'Neill's play. Not really an adaptation, I guess, but just using his play straightforward word for word. It's an interesting role and performance for Hepburn. This is one of those family dramas where everyone is fucked up and the film is about how they don't discuss how fucked up each person is and just avoid confronting anything. Hepburn is a morphine addict with a super successful veteran actor husband who cheated on her a lot. Her youngest son is a drunk who is also sick with consumption. Her older son is a drunk and I guess just an overall degenerate and womanizer. Her husband is a drunk. Addiction is in the family. Hepburn's performance to me feels way too melodramatic and theatrical. She is playing to the back row and I feel this would have been great on Broadway. But she is reciting lines she memorized and rehearsed more than she is giving a lived in performance. She is all over the place and that fits the addict aesthetic but doesn't quite fit what the role is. She is just too actorly. It does fit with the rest of the film and the performances and I kinda like the direction from Sidney Lumet, but it's a filmed play. I actually think that Dean Stockwell as the younger son is the best actor of the bunch. Jason Robards is pretty great because he is 40 years old playing I think maybe 20s or 30s. Ralph Richardson is as theatrical as Hepburn is. It just really is not a natural performance. It suffers from being so calculated and rehearsed that I can't really enjoy it as much as some of these other women in this category. To make clear, she is a good actress, but I feel she doesn't have the right tone for the film and it just seems off to me. I know she can be better and I'm hoping this is a blip in her many nominations.

Geraldine Page - Sweet Bird of Youth

If you have followed this blog at all, you know I have not been very kind to Geraldine Page in my reviews of her. This is the sixth out of her eight nominations I have reviewed and I have to say that this is the best one I have seen so far. That isn't any faint praise or anything, she gives her best performance so far to me. It's a Tennessee Williams play that Page originated the role on Broadway and was nominated for a Tony Award for it. So this performance has that lived in quality where the actor is more than familiar with the role and character and it shows. Page plays a movie star who is getting away from Hollywood due to her own perceived notion that her career is over. She is a drunk and pill popper and sleeping with Paul Newman as they hide out in his hometown. She mostly just stays in her hotel room, figuring out who Newman is and where they are and coming back down from her bender. She laments her work and her life and she is a very dramatic type of person with wild mood swings, definitely the Hollywood type. Page plays all of this very well without it ever feeling melodramatic or it being too much. Her interactions with Newman are fun to watch as they are both using each other to get what they want. Page also looks the best that I have seen of her, she looks like a movie star. She plays a woman trying to figure out her life and assuage her fears and Page communicates the myriad of emotions wonderfully. It's nice that I have enjoyed one of her performances finally because I hate to dislike an actress, especially one that people consider one of the best to ever do it. Hoping her final two nominations are on this same level.

Lee Remick - Days of Wine and Roses

This is a film you could probably consider a forgotten gem. Yes, it also stars Jack Lemmon in an amazing dramatic role, but I think it feels mostly forgotten in today's film and Oscar world. Which is a shame because it's a great film. Remick plays a young woman who works as a secretary at a public relations firm and meets Lemmon and is mostly standoffish to him. I actually really enjoyed Remick early in the performance because not only was she so natural in her acting unimpressed with Lemmon, she felt refreshing in that she didn't feel like an actress from the early 60s. She felt very modern and her swatting Lemmon down at every turn was nice to see. Eventually she agrees to go out with him and he gets her to start drinking. They get married one night after getting drunk and there we see that this is a story about alcoholics. The two become heavily co-dependent on each other and the booze and we see them get into all kinds of issues because of drinking. Lemmon loses his job, there are arrests and hospital visits, Remick burns the house down while Lemmon is away. It's a greatest hits of all the terrible things that alcohol can do to two normal, functioning adults who have a great life. They have a baby and Remick actually stops drinking, but then is urged by Lemmon to do so because he misses her being drunk. This parasitic relationship is tough to watch and Remick is so good in the role. I appreciate how she plays her drunken character because it never devolves into campiness or anything theatrical or melodramatic. It feels real, especially because she is this beautiful woman who as the films goes on gets less attractive and looks like an old barfly. Both she and Lemmon have great chemistry even when drunk and watching their trainwreck unfold is mesmerizing. You can't look away even though it's pretty raw at times. And there is no happy ending, which I liked about the film. It's true to life because she doesn't magically one day become sober and all is perfect again. That's why this is a devastating performance from Remick because she is this bright, beautiful, independent woman who has a great future and alcohol utterly destroys all of that and leaves her a shell of her former self. A really strong performance from Remick that I recommend watching.


Damn, what a great year for this category! Actually kinda hard to figure out where to place everyone and now I see the limits of a ranked system. I know I was a bit harsh on Hepburn, but she is the weak link for me. Some people would probably vehemently disagree and that's okay. Just didn't think the performance meshed well with the film. Page surprised me that I actually really enjoyed her. Maybe because she was playing an actress coming off a bender that it wasn't much acting? Not saying anything about Page personally, don't know her like that, but it feels like that's a role that is easy to have fun with and make into something good. Davis was awesome. Way more modern than I anticipated and just a crazy fun performance. Man, if not for Bancroft living in that role and owning it, Remick would be an easy winner. She is so good at her role and especially playing the drunk parts, which is usually so hard to do and comes off campy. Bancroft deserved the win and I loved it. Great group of nominees and what I always want this category to be.

Oscar Winner: Anne Bancroft - The Miracle Worker
My Winner:  Anne Bancroft - The Miracle Worker
Lee Remick
Bette Davis
Geraldine Page
Katharine Hepburn

Supporting Actor 1962

So many weird choices, that I hope they pan out. Come with me and let's find out.

1962 Best Supporting Actor

Ed Begley - Sweet Bird of Youth

Having finally watched this performance, I can understand why Begley won. It's a pretty meaty role for Supporting and Begley seems perfect for the job. Begley plays a political boss who controls everything in his small town, having been a Governor before that. His daughter is Shirley Knight and she loves Paul Newman's character, but Begley hates him. The point of the film is that Begley has successfully sent Newman away from his daughter a couple of times before and Newman is back for one more shot as Begley again runs interference. Begley fits the profile of what you'd think a southern political boss to be. He's large in size and in personality. He's loud and demonstrative and he knows how to play everyone around him. He has that political switch in him where he can smile and schmooze the public and then threaten someone with that same smile. It's essentially the villain role and Begley is up for the part. He's intimidating and gregarious all at once and Begley makes sure that is what we see on screen. It probably also helps that he is an older white man in this category of newcomers and darker complexions. It wouldn't surprise me that the Academy went for him simply because he is what they know. But the performance is also pretty good and competes for being the best part of a star studded acting ensemble.

Victor Buono - What Ever Happened to Baby Jane?

This is one of those films that I think people just know about even if they have never actually seen it. It pioneered the psycho biddy film genre where an older woman who was once prominent terrorizes those around her. Which is what this film is about. Bette Davis is the Baby Jane, an older woman living with her crippled sister. Davis was once a popular child singer, but her sister went on to greater fame before she was paralyzed. The two live together and Davis terrorizes her sister, played by Joan Crawford. It's sort of a horror film in a way and is really interesting to see something like this get attention. Obviously due in large part to Davis and Crawford's well noted antagonistic relationship. This was Buono's film debut and he plays a rather simple role. He answers an ad from Davis for a pianist so she can sing her songs again. He has a rather pleasant disposition and is a rather large fellow in height and weight. There's honestly not much to the role. Buono is fine in the role and has some funny moments but is mostly there for Davis to toy with or stroke her ego on remembering her past. He's just there to get some money for playing the piano and seemingly doesn't notice Davis being crazy or simply doesn't care. Don't really understand why this was nominated but at least it's not the biggest head scratcher in this category.

Telly Savalas - Birdman of Alcatraz

I am not sure what this nomination is for exactly. It feels like Savalas snuck in the Academy door while Burt Lancaster was distracting everyone with his performance. It's legit a nothing performance that when you watch it, you'll be left scratching your head as well. Savalas plays another inmate of Lancaster who mostly is there to be someone who also wants a bird in his cell and helps procure some for Lancaster and that is almost the extent of the performance. There is one other scene later on at Alcatraz where the two meet again after years and Savalas gives him extra food. That's it. That's the performance. Not anything that should have been nominated. Savalas wasn't yet portraying Kojak, so he didn't have that going for him yet. Weird nomination that took the spot of another actor and film that would have been way more interesting to watch.

Omar Sharif - Lawrence of Arabia

Big fan of Omar Sharif. Loved him in Doctor Zhivago and realized he was a great actor then. His performance here as Sharif Ali is important because there were a couple other people picked as this character before Sharif. Sharif was a hugely popular actor in his native Egypt, but eventually landed this role which launched him into global superstardom. One of the few actual native or Arabic actors in this film. Sharif became best friends with Peter O'Toole and it actually doesn't show on film because the two were often at odds. Sharif plays a bedouin leader who challenges Lawrence at every opportunity. At first the two seem to be adversaries, but then Sharif warms up to this white man being right and guiding them in the right direction. This brofest seems to end towards the end of the film when Lawrence is out for revenge versus the Turks and allows them all to be killed. Sharif sees this change and tries to move on from his friend. In the beginning Sharif was the dominant figure and by the end, O'Toole had become the dominant figure and worst representative of the British. Sharif just had that movie star quality and I'm glad he got out of Egypt to be able to show us his ability. He has this great presence and one of the best entrances in film history. Really easy to root for and like Sharif and he only makes the film better.

Terence Stamp - Billy Budd

This is one of the worst cases of category fraud ever. I feel like because this was Stamp's debut film, that they put him in Supporting because they didn't know him and he was new. But he is Billy Budd. The whole film is about him as he is a young seaman working on a merchant ship who gets conscripted into the Royal Navy. He's sort of a simple man who is very friendly and easily likable. Everyone likes him including the Captain. The only one who doesn't is the Master-at-Arms who seems to be a ruthless, vindictive liar of a man who doesn't like not being feared. Stamp has some human moments with Robert Ryan (who is also great) the Master-at-Arms and those moments really humanize Ryan's character and shows just how genuine and warm Billy Budd is. Stamp does a great job of making Budd into this lovable character that we know is eager to do a good job and avoid doing anything wrong. He doesn't want to rock the boat, so to speak. Stamp also makes his stammering when angry or nervous something believable and imbues the character with some tenderness, since Budd is only about 18 in the film. It's a pretty great debut for an actor that is the main focus of the film and really should have gone in Lead, though he probably wouldn't have made it in the stacked Leading category for this year. So I guess it's good Stamp was nominated here because I really enjoyed this film and felt it had a bit more depth than just a seafaring adventure film.

Kind of a mixed bag for this category. Some head scratchers and some decent performances. Savalas is honestly like a what the fuck nomination. So short and leaves no impact and takes up a spot for someone else. I liked Buono but I think he just came along for the ride with that film. Decent performance, but not a whole lot to it. I do think about him when I think about the film, though, so that's something. Begley won because I'm convinced he is all that the Academy voters knew. Old and white, while everyone else was a different shade and/or were young. Begley is good in his role and helps make the film, but I don't think it was a winner. I love Stamp's performance but it is absolutely category fraud, though no fault with Stamp. Glad I got to watch that film. Sharif gets the win because he is so good and so memorable and just so likeable in that role. Iconic and an all timer. Easy winner there. Hoping the next year is not such a mixed bag.

Oscar Winner: Ed Begley - Sweet Bird of Youth
My Winner:  Omar Sharif - Lawrence of Arabia
Terence Stamp
Ed Begley
Victor Buono
Telly Savalas

Supporting Actress 1962

A lot of birds in this one.

1962 Best Supporting Actress

Patty Duke - The Miracle Worker

This is one of those winners that always gets talked about as being pretty strong and maybe one of the top winners in this category. It can also be a bit divisive as some people prefer Angela Lansbury in this year, but I think that has to do with the whole strange actressexual blogger communities. Not to get away from Duke's win, she plays Helen Keller who we all should know. Stricken deaf and blind due to an illness as a baby. This film shows how she was taught by Anne Bancroft's Anne Sullivan in how to communicate and unleash the person inside of her. Duke was fifteen at the time of filming and had played the role on stage for awhile. So it's impressive that at fifteen she was able to deliver such a great and physical performance, but it also makes sense seeing as she did this on stage over and over. With a role like this you have to strike a balance that doesn't devolve into some ham fisted display where you are rooting around like a monkey but also not being convincing enough. And Duke is beyond convincing as a deaf and blind girl. It's what struck me immediately is how her eyes stay fixated on nothing and she doesn't move like someone who is hearing able and can react. She stays in character the whole time and only some very few times does it ever feel a bit goofy. Mostly it just feels like she is the real deal and it honestly is impressive to me. Duke herself said that the role is what won the Oscar and I can understand that. I think in any capable hands like Duke, the actor would have probably won for this. But Duke is the one that did it on stage and on film and did it convincingly. So this is definitely more than just the role, even if Duke doesn't have to say words and can wildly thrash about, there is acting here and it's very good.

Mary Badham - To Kill a Mockingbird

If you have followed this blog to any degree, you will know that I detest child actors. They are usually either way too precocious or are being told what to do rather than acting. It's kind of ironic that this year had the youngest nominee ever in Badham and then the youngest winner in Patty Duke. But I happen to like both, though I would not call Duke a child actor. So yes, I thoroughly enjoyed Badham's performance. And I love that she represents all of Scout, Jem, and Dill. These are legitimately some of the best child actors I have ever seen. That is definitely not hyperbole coming from me. All three of them are so natural and convincing as small town southern children. They easily help elevate this film to its iconic status because if the kids are grating or annoying or just outright awful, the film would suffer and would not be thought of as highly if you ask me. But all three of them just have this great quality and I think it's due to their acting ability but also director Robert Mulligan's direction. He said that he only did a few takes with the kids or at least took from the first few takes because they would become less natural over time and stilted. And it shows that their acting is so light and fun and comes from a place of authenticity. Seriously this whole film is perfect and the kids' acting has a lot to do with that. Badham was never going to win the Oscar but I feel that she definitely deserves to be here representing the kids and the film.

Shirley Knight - Sweet Bird of Youth

For what could be just a wisp of a character, Knight does all she can to make her character relevant in the film. Caught in the middle of a tug of war between her overbearing political boss father (Ed Begley) and the man she loves who keeps coming in and out of her life (Paul Newman), the character can easily get lost as just a piece of property of two very different men. But Knight brings her character to life instead of moving through the film as some sort of rag doll. The character has a bit of independence to her that feels more of a choice by Knight rather than something Tennessee Williams wrote for this role. Unfortunately, the story really doesn't let Knight do all that much with the role, although she tries to wring more than just pretty young woman out of it. Most of the scenes she has are just running to Newman or away from her father. I wish she had a bit more to do because you can see that Knight would have done something great with it. This was her second and final nomination, so the Academy clearly loved her. I am hoping that her first nomination has her doing much more in her performance. Knight is good here, but the role just isn't all that meaty enough as the men dominate the film.

Angela Lansbury- The Manchurian Candidate

One of the cool things about this project is when you find someone unexpected that has an Oscar nomination. It's happened a few times where you look over the categories and go oh wow, I didn't know they were nominated before! This is one of those as everyone of a certain age probably knows her best as the lady from Murder, She Wrote. But she was an accomplished actress before that as evidenced here. This also goes against type for what I know her as, so it's a bit refreshing to see her play this subtly villainous role. And what I liked most about it is how we know something is up with her character the whole time but it slowly unravels just to how deep her treachery goes. Like peeling back an onion, there are so many layers to it. Lansbury doesn't play the character full tilt and I like that choice a lot. It's more mysterious in just who she is and what her plans are instead of getting some caricature or whatever the female equivalent of twirling your mustache is. And since I haven't mentioned it yet, she plays the mother of a "war hero" who in reality has been brainwashed after being captured in North Korea to become a sleeper agent in America. She manipulates her son and her husband and, well, you can watch the rest to see just how exactly Lansbury figures into it because I was trying to understand just what she was up to. It's really intriguing and makes me respect Lansbury more as an actress who took on a role such as this. I do wonder if I had seen her work prior to this, how would I react to this nomination? Would it subvert my expectations in the same way? I'll have two more nominations of hers to review in the 40s and I'm looking forward to those.

Thelma Ritter - Birdman of Alcatraz

This is my first Thelma Ritter nomination to review, though I have seen her in some other films for this project. This was Ritter's sixth and final nomination, all in Supporting Actress, making her the most nominated in this category without a win. And that's what this nomination feels like to me: an attempt to get her the win finally. Not to say she is bad, she is perfectly fine in the role as the mother of Burt Lancaster's character. But there just isn't much to the performance that will grab you at all. It's a thin role that anyone could have fulfilled in the same way Ritter did. It's just not enough for a nomination for me. She goes to bat fighting to keep her son from being hanged and when that is commuted to a life sentence, she plays the supportive mother until Lancaster marries a woman who kinda takes on that role. Nothing explosive in that outcome and nothing to point to as any kind of great moment. It's a dutiful performance that feels like Lancaster dragged her (and Telly Savalas) along with him. I understand that this role was a bit against type for Ritter, so I'm hoping that's why she was nominated and not an indictment on her acting ability. Really hoping Ritter doesn't become another Geraldine Page situation where I can't stand any of her many nominations. We will have plenty of opportunity to see coming up.


This is a pretty interesting group of nominees. I wonder how many times I have typed that sentence out? I think it's pretty clear that Duke is your winner and my winner. She has lived in that performance and has made it her own and is awesome in it. Ritter is my bottom because she just doesn't add anything and it feels more like the Academy trying to get her a win than her actually being Oscar worthy. Anyone can play that role to the same effectiveness. Knight took what could have been a nothing role and forced it to be noticed and I love that. It fails more from the writing and direction because she could have made it really good I feel. Badham is such a nice nominee here. Like I am so glad she got recognized for her work, which really probably represents all of the kids, because she is so natural and great. And I dislike child nominees, so that tells you something there. Lansbury was fun to see her be a villain and she gave a great performance. Would have won if not for Duke, but nothing wrong with that. A pretty decent group of women and I am excited to keep it going.

Oscar Winner: Patty Duke - The Miracle Worker
My Winner:  Patty Duke - The Miracle Worker
Angela Lansbury
Mary Badham
Shirley Knight
Thelma Ritter