OSCAR, Best Actor

Walter Huston was John Huston's father. John Huston was Anjelica Huston's father.

I believe that they are the only family with three generations of Oscar winners. I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

How about the Barrymore's?
And thanks,Mac.

You're welcome, Booman - I love research...

Ethel Barrymore won 1 Oscar and was nominated for 3 others. Her brother, Lionel won 1 Oscar and was nominated for 1 Best Director Oscar. (They were Drew's great-aunt and great-uncle, respectively.) Their brother, John, who was Drew's grandfather, was never nominated for an Academy Award. Drew's not exactly holding up her end either, is she?

I don't know what made me think Drew might have won one. I do know I figured with the numbers there might be two more generations of winners.
Okay, just for the heck of it, besides the Voights(Jolie), which families have 2 gens.

Booman<

Last evening I wrote you one of my usual brilliant posts re: Chicago in general, and Queen Latifah in particular.

Evidently, I forgot to post that eloquent piece of writing.

So, before I forget once again to hit the "Submit" button, let me tell you that I am not surprised at all over Queen Latifah's good fortune. While viewing Chicago, I knew Ms. Latifah would capture a Best Supporting Actress nomination.

She is a commanding presence in her every scene. She causes quite a stir with her bawdy vaudeville number. She does a sight-gag with a blonde wig that will bowl you over.

<BTW> I was correct, too, about John C. Reilly. His acting in Chicago is splendid, and his number, "Mr. Cellophane," is at once both poignant and disturbing.

Re: Queen Latifah, and with no slight intended toward her at all, I have to wonder if race wasn't a factor in her nomination. I expect that there would have been some signficant media chatter if not one African-American was nominated this year after Washington and Berry won last year. I thought Latifah was very good in Chicago and Lord knows the Academy has a history of interesting first time noms in the supporting categories (paging Ms. Tomei!), but with such a strong field in play this year, I thought the Queen's performance was a little too broad to merit the nomination.

Tim<

Your remarks re: Queen Latifah have a tinge of racism

The part Ms. Latifah so well-played in Chicago was written to be acted and performed broadly. The part of the prison guard could have well been played by an actress of any color. There is nothing in the screenplay which necessarily calls for an African-American actress.

I think Ms. Latifah was chosen to play this role solely on ability and not for the color of her skin. Her Oscar nomination is a tribute to her talent and not her ethnicity.

Henry Fonda - Academy Award for "Grapes of Wrath"
Jane Fonda - Academies for "Klute" and "Coming Home"
Peter Fonda - nominated for Best Actor in 1998 "Ulee's Gold"

No nominations yet for Bridget Fonda, Troy Garity, or Justin Fonda.

Tim, you took all the spirit out of me. I think I'll retire now.

You know, I really thought about that potential reaction before I pressed the Submit button, but I hoped that people would assume benign intent. Oh, well...

wh3, if your use of the term "racist", tinged or otherwise, implies that my statement was "having to do with race", then obviously it was. I truly wondered if race was a factor in the nomination. But if your use of the term was intended to imply that I am a racist -- with all the abhorrent connotations that go along with that term -- then I would suggest that you rushed to judgement. I believe my pondering the role of race in this activity is logical and acceptable, especially after the extraordinary emphasis on the topic in last year's awards. I may be cynical, but I do not believe I am a racist.

As noted previously, I meant no slight toward Queen Latifah, who I thought did well in the role. But for my personal tastes in acting, I thought the performance was a little one-note and lacked subtlety. It may have been exactly what Rob Marshall and the writers wanted in the role, but that doesn't mean that it merits a nomination. You can play broad and still show some dimension to the performance -- as an example, I would offer up Kathy Bates in the TV version of Annie. Broad as a barn but with lots of different notes. Actually, Bates would have been an excellent choice for Momma.

I would suggest that none of us have any real idea as to why Queen Latifah was cast. The back door dealings of the Hollywood casting machine are rarely left open for us to peek in. No doubt she met the expected requirements of physical type and vocal quality, but, beyond that, who knows?

Booman, sorry I took away your spirit. I did not mean to do so.

Just a little clarification: Henry Fonda was nominated for Grapes of Wrath, but won for On Golden Pond.

Link to IMDb's Henry Fonda - Awards and Nominations page

Correct call macs. I took the info from another source:




I checked 'Oscar Stars A-Z', the winner of the 1940 Academy Award for Best Actor was James Stewart in 'Philadelphia Story'.

Tim<

Your post brought up the subject of race.

My response was that your remarks had a "tinge of racism." I did not call you a racist, sir, and stand by my reply.

It is too late, now, however, for you to take back your post with the racial overtones.

Thank you.

WH,
...Before I was distracted I was about to commend you on you r eloquent writing, and especially your overwhelming modesty.

Okay Tim,...benefit of the doubt...Peace

Booman<

How nice of you to mention my modesty. It is indeed a virtue.

Thank you


:wink:

Oscar for best actor
LarryBS et al

You know, this is the first time I can remember where I won't get my nose out of joint if my favorites don't get an Oscar. IMHO this has been a banner year for damn good movies with damn good acting.

Larry, I saw "The Pianist" and thought Adrien brody was very good. But the role itself was rather even and wasn't as demanding as the roles played by Nicholson and, especially, Caine. Still have not seen Day-Lewis or Gere.

Larr Richette,

I had not read your comments on THE QUIET AMERICAN before posting mine.
I guess we could not be farther apart in our opinion of that movie. You're an erudite s.o.b. (complement) and I respect your perscipacity. Having said so, I continue to be amazed how subjective the criticism of all art is. No work of art can be proved to be better than another. Having said that, I think one of the joys of life is trying to do just that - trying to prove one work of art better than another.

I wonder if the size of the opulent "Siamese byzantiine" decor theater(about 400 seats) and the packed house influenced my opinion. Both the audience to THE PIANIST and THE QUIET AMERICAN sat glued to their seats throughout the long credits.

I haven't seen either Adaptation or Streets of NY and will probably, based on the preview, avoid seeing Streets. I heard it was grand opera and grand guignol...it looked awful!!! And Daniel Day-Lewis, who was so good in quite a few films, including the Christie Brown pic and the Salem witch trial film and the film about the boxer who ended up in the Haze, seems to have turned into canned ham in Streets.

On the other hand, Cage -- in previews -- looked amazing in Adaptation. I am waiting for it to reach second run theatres.

I detested the film As Good As It Gets and hated that Nicolson won the Oscar for that piece of garbage.

As of now, I am behind Michael Caine, 100%! BTW, he has one best actor and one best supporting Oscar. I like the fact that he isn't educated...love to see the non-educated triumph!

Did think the cellophane man person in Chicago was good but that is a supporting role.

WOW: Michael Caine, uneducated. Who'da thunk it?

As a matter of fact, Ya' sure you didn't mean "formally" educated?