1981 Oscar Viewing Project

We are officially announcing our 30th completed Oscar Viewing Project.  As of yesterday, I have officially seen all of the narrative, feature-length nominees from the ceremony, and as we do here, we'll be ranking all of the major categories.  You'll note with this list that part of the reason that I got some of these completed was that 1981 is one of the most repetitive Oscars ever-all five of the Best Picture nominees got Best Director nominations, and they produced half of the acting nominations (in the pre-2009 era, this was a pretty high metric).  In terms of the box office, though, this is who led the field:

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. On Golden Pond

3. Superman II

4. Arthur

5. Stripes

6. The Cannonball Run

7. Chariots of Fire

8. For Your Eyes Only

9. The Four Seasons

10. Time Bandits

Of these, I have seen only five of the top box office draws of the year.  The 1980's, especially the early 1980's, were still in the era where box office and Oscar's tastes were pretty much synonymous, so this is a relatively light list for Oscar nominees (as the only five films that I've seen are the five that are listed below).  I will for sure see Superman II & The Four Seasons before I complete the year for the My Ballot (where I pick the nominees...hopefully should complete that here by early June, though we'll do the 1957 My Ballot next)...the remainder are more of a question mark (make your cases for them in the comments).  If you're new here, also, look at the bottom of the page for links to all of our past 29 OVP's.

With that said, it's time to start impressing Jodie Foster, firing up your IBM computer, & wanting your MTV.  And of course, let's remember the movies...

(Note: Raiders of the Lost Ark received a Best Sound Editing Oscar at the ceremony as a special prize.  Given its nominations in other categories, I obviously saw this film, but wanted to make sure to note it-when we get to the My Ballot in the next two months for 1981, I will have this be a competitive race)

Note from John: When I did this series during the time when I wrote individual articles, and had this blog be a daily part of my life, I made a point of highlighting each nominee in my many write-ups.  While I will be writing these every time I complete a year (we'll have at least one OVP and/or My Ballot every month going forward), I can't make that time commitment, either in terms of number of articles or in terms of giving each nominee their due with a mention.  I promise, though, that I have given each nominee their due under the confines of the specific category while making my rankings (and of course I've seen every single nominated picture), including giving higher rankings to movies I didn't like if the craft was better than ones I did like (Oscar should consider that!).  Hopefully you enjoy the trimmed-down, but still devoted to the original concept version of the OVP we'll have going forward!

Picture

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. On Golden Pond

4. Chariots of Fire

5. Atlantic City

The Lowdown: This is, all things considered, one of the best Best Picture lineups that Oscar assembled during the 1980's, an era of moviemaking I generally find a bit underwhelming.  None of these movies is bad, but the two truly great ones of the lineup are Raiders and Reds, both from directors at the peak of their creative powers.  I'm going to favor Spielberg's Raiders.  It's less in Oscar's wheelhouse (but these are my choices for a reason), but I think that it is a tighter film, and defines the action-adventure genre.  Reds will be showing up again though (and as you'll see in the coming categories, is a movie I loved).

Director

1. Steven Spielberg (Raiders of the Lost Ark)

2. Warren Beatty (Reds)

3. Mark Rydell (On Golden Pond)

4. Hugh Hudson (Chariots of Fire)

5. Louis Malle (Atlantic City

The Lowdown: We're also going to give Spielberg his second OVP statue for Best Director, once again for a movie he didn't actually win for (can't stress enough how the links to the years we've covered are at the bottom of this page).  It's such a perfectly shot movie, giving us Harrison Ford's iconic archaeologist and a series of flawless adventure sequences.  Beatty's breathtaking too, though, particularly that effortlessly romantic scene at the train station.

Actor

1. Warren Beatty (Reds)

2. Henry Fonda (On Golden Pond)

3. Paul Newman (Absence of Malice)

4. Burt Lancaster (Atlantic City)

5. Dudley Moore (Arthur)

The Lowdown: Don't feel too bad for Beatty, though, as he's going to get a Best Actor statue for our OVP next.  The big fight here for me is between Beatty, whose John Reed is such an impassioned, imperfect example of a revolutionary (pun intended) man, bitter about his inability to be everything he dreamed (but still accomplishing true greatness).  Fonda is excellent in On Golden Pond, wrapping up a career that surely should've gotten an Oscar by then, but as a reminder we pick these winners in a vacuum, so it's possible that we're turning down Fonda's only shot at an OVP win from me, but objectively Beatty is stronger.

Actress

1. Diane Keaton (Reds)

2. Meryl Streep (The French Lieutenant's Woman)

3. Katharine Hepburn (On Golden Pond)

4. Marsha Mason (Only When I Laugh)

5. Susan Sarandon (Atlantic City)

The Lowdown: With the exception of Sarandon (who I think doesn't get Malle's tricky material) this is an underrated "all-timer" lineup, including the best thing I've seen (to date) from Marsha Mason.  For the win, though, it's between Streep and Keaton.  Streep's French Lieutenant's Woman has its detractors (including Streep herself), but I love what she does here, defining two women in similar fashions, both controlled by the same man.  There was a time I considered giving this to Streep (whom, it should be noted, has yet to win one of our OVP's or My Ballot's), but Keaton's sensational here, and giving the best dramatic performance of her career (don't you wish she'd do this instead of yet another spin on Annie Hall just once more?).

Supporting Actor

1. Jack Nicholson (Reds)

2. John Gielgud (Arthur)

3. Howard Rollins, Jr. (Ragtime)

4. Ian Holm (Chariots of Fire)

5. James Coco (Only When I Laugh)

The Lowdown: A lot of first-time OVP rendezvous this year with actors like Hepburn, Mason, Sarandon, Lancaster, & Newman, but it's hard not to think getting to talk about Jack for the first time is the biggest highlight of the bunch.  One of my all-time favorite actors, and you see why here.  His Eugene O'Neill is ruthless, him taking on the role of the "scorned lover" so deliciously ("you're a cheap gutter whore from Portland" being one of the most quotable lines he nails here).  Gielgud is delightful in Arthur and Rollins is the best part of Ragtime, but I am going to give this to Jack (who is definitely in the running to get the most total OVP and My Ballot acting statues before this is over).

Supporting Actress

1. Maureen Stapleton (Reds)

2. Melinda Dillon (Absence of Malice)

3. Elizabeth McGovern (Ragtime)

4. Jane Fonda (On Golden Pond)

5. Joan Hackett (Only When I Laugh)

The Lowdown: Yes, you're reading that right.  For the first (and perhaps only?) time, we are giving all four of the OVP acting statues to the same film, a movie that wasn't able to win Best Picture.  Unlike the other three acting categories, though, Stapleton doesn't have a lot of nearby options that would be respectable choices to beat her.  She nails this part, giving her Emma Goldman an electricity that makes you understand her importance in every scene she's in.  Dillon, McGovern, & Fonda all have their moments, and are roughly on-par (without Stapleton this would've been a more competitive field), but Stapleton being there makes it easy.

Adapted Screenplay

1. The French Lieutenant's Woman

2. On Golden Pond

3. Prince of the City

4. Pennies from Heaven

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: A particularly weak lineup that isn't entirely Oscar's fault (virtually all of the best films of 1981 were original ideas, unimaginable today), for me it's a contest between the first two, as I thought the screenplays on the remaining pictures were a yawn.  I'm going to give it to The French Lieutenant's Woman, though.  While On Golden Pond had far more quotable lines ("you're my knight in shining armor..." being a classic speech), I think that it doesn't tread deeply enough in the relationship between real-life father-and-daughter Hank & Jane, and I was totally sold on the gimmick of The French Lieutenant's Woman being both a story within a story, something that wasn't in the John Fowles' novel.

Original Screenplay

1. Reds

2. Atlantic City

3. Chariots of Fire

4. Arthur

5. Absence of Malice

The Lowdown: On the flip side, while this isn't that great of a lineup, it at least has one terrific script in the bunch.  Reds is phenomenal, and rises above the cost of an epic (i.e. that the screenplay is regularly the weakest part of it) by giving us a genuine, enthralling love story between two people who can't seem to live without each other (even if they might have to).  Atlantic City has a lovely gimmick, and Chariots of Fire is moving (and Arthur, specifically the parts with Gielgud, can be funny), but none of them can compete with Reds, the one triumph in this field (that should've included Raiders of the Lost Ark).

Foreign Language Film

1. Mephisto (Hungary)

2. Muddy River (Japan)

3. The Boat is Full (Switzerland)

4. Man of Iron (Poland)

5. Three Brothers (Italy)

The Lowdown: One of those years where the Foreign Language Film (now the International Feature Film) category features movies that were only cited for this prize, and nowhere else, so this is your only chance to speak about any of the contenders.  The best of this bunch are Mephisto, a spin on the Faust concept (literally...the main character is an actor best known for playing the devil), and Muddy River, a moving look at friendship across income levels through the eyes of a child.  I'm going with Mephisto, because I think it's grander and has a better central performance from Klaus Marie Brandeur (it also won the Oscar), but Muddy River is not far off and really worth your time if you've never heard of it.

Original Score

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Chariots of Fire

3. On Golden Pond

4. Ragtime

5. Dragonslayer

The Lowdown: Honestly, in a normal year this would be a slam dunk for something like On Golden Pond, a superb score that can barely muster a bronze here.  Raiders and Chariots are two of the most iconic film scores for a reason, and it's hard to argue with either of them (fun fact: I played "Hymne" by Vangelis for a piano recital when I was in middle school and still have the sheet music for it, even though I don't even have a piano).  I'm going to go with Raiders because I have more of an emotional connection to it, and because I think it's most consistent throughout the actual movie, but this is a coin toss race.

Original Song

1. "Endless Love" (Endless Love)

2. "For Your Eyes Only" (For Your Eyes Only)

3. "Arthur's Theme" (Arthur)

4. "The First Time It Happens" (The Great Muppet Caper)

5. "One More Hour" (Ragtime)

The Lowdown: If you look just at the movie titles here, I'm definitely not picking the best films of the bunch.  Bette Midler quite famously did a send-up of how bad the movies were in this lineup when she presented it (check it out if you haven't seen it...it was the funniest moment in an otherwise pretty tepid ceremony, comically speaking), and both of the Top 2 got the worst of it.  But I don't really connect with Christopher Cross, and I think "Endless Love" is both a moving little ballad, and one that fits the saccharine movie it's housing, just a bit better than the also good "For Your Eyes Only."  Had "Hey a Movie" gotten in from The Great Muppet Caper, we'd be having a reranking here as I always love the Muppets onscreen.

Sound

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. Pennies from Heaven

4. Outland

5. On Golden Pond

The Lowdown: We are once again pitting Raiders vs. Reds, and once again Raiders is coming out on top.  It's just hard to argue with the play on the Saturday morning adventure serial, but now in the mold of a giant movie blockbuster.  Reds is subtler with its sound work, and would make a fine win as well...particularly the crowd scenes feel authentic, melded with the music, but still have a grand aura.  Pennies from Heaven, the token musical that always shows up for Sound...is fine.

Art Direction

1. Heaven's Gate

2. Raiders of the Lost Ark

3. Reds

4. The French Lieutenant's Woman

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: The best lineup of the bunch, there is not a single bad nominee in this group, and any of them would work as a winner.  I loved the shifts in time being played with in French Lieutenant's Woman, the over-abundance of sets in Ragtime (you understand why this became a musical), the book-laden interiors of Reds, and the continental jumping of Raiders.  But if I have to pick a winner, it needs to be Heaven's Gate, a really grand movie that was (at the time) one of the most famous flops ever made, but it looks spectacular, and I love the shifting stages & devotion to the western on display.

Cinematography

1. Reds

2. Raiders of the Lost Ark

3. Excalibur

4. On Golden Pond

5. Ragtime

The Lowdown: For the first (and only) time in this article, you will see me ever so slightly favor Reds over Raiders.  Despite loving them both, this is the only Oscar contest that I feel Beatty's film exceeds.  I love the camerawork in Raiders (that rolling boulder...come on now, it's iconic for a reason), but I can't help but feel that the use of temperature (you can practically feel the warmth & cold emanating off of the screen in Reds), plus the famous train scene, are impossible to deny.  Kudos also to Excalibur, which has the feel of a shoe-string budget but still gives us glorious looks at Nicol Williamson & Helen Mirren in their entrancing witchiness.

Costume

1. Reds

2. The French Lieutenant's Woman

3. Ragtime

4. Pennies from Heaven

5. Chariots of Fire

The Lowdown: With Indy's fedora left off the dais, it's a contest between the period work of Reds and the period work of The French Lieutenant's Woman (don't look at me like that-I have at least one contemporary film on the list currently for the My Ballot...it's Oscar that never goes there).  Of the two, I go with Reds because I think it is more consistent overall.  There's more care put into French Lieutenant's when it comes to the period stuff than the modern scenes, and Ragtime behind it doesn't break the mold in the way that the of-the-people looks in Reds achieve.

Film Editing

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Reds

3. The French Lieutenant's Woman

4. Chariots of Fire

5. On Golden Pond

The Lowdown: Again, another Raiders & Reds contest (our final one), with everyone else just getting the scraps.  I think the editing exhibits why these two tower above.  Raiders is fast-paced, effortlessly so in a way that makes every scene feel timeless (which, after nearly 45 years of existence, it really is), while Reds gets a slow-burn, us investing continually as the movie finds its own romance.  The timelessness wins it for Raiders, though (kudos also to French Lieuentant's for working so well with the time jumps).

Makeup

1. An American Werewolf in London

2. Heartbeeps

The Lowdown: We have a pair of two-wide races to complete this year's Oscar's, starting with Makeup (for the record, both of these categories I'll go five-wide when I pick my personal choices).  This was the first year of the Best Makeup category, and they did something that would become commonplace at the Oscars: nominating Rick Baker (the maestro behind An American in Werewolf) and giving the title of "Oscar-nominated" to a truly heinous movie.  There are few films as bad as Heartbeeps, but what's worse is the makeup in it is bizarrely lazy, particularly when you had much better options nominated in 1981 (it's just Bernadette Peters & Andy Kaufman covered in a plastic sheen).  Conversely, An American Werewolf is one of the best achievements of Rick Baker's career, so an easy call for him to take this.

Visual Effects

1. Raiders of the Lost Ark

2. Dragonslayer

The Lowdown: A second category that is only two-wide, we have two films competing against each other in another lopsided victory where I definitely go with Oscar's choice.  At this point, anything George Lucas or Steven Spielberg were creating was foundational to the future of blockbuster cinema, and Raiders is a genius use of practical and special effects, particularly the face-melting scene when they open the Ark.  Dragonslayer, though, unlike Heartbeeps is a genuinely quality product and earned this spot (and will likely make my My Ballot as well for its great use of the imposing dragon in the picture).

Past Oscar Viewing Projects: 1931-32, 1948, 1957, 1999, 2000, 2001, 2002, 2003, 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024

OVP: Stage Door (1937)

Film: Stage Door (1937)

Stars: Katharine Hepburn, Ginger Rogers, Adolphe Menjou, Gail Patrick, Constance Collier, Andrea Leeds, Lucille Ball, Eve Arden, Ann Miller

Director: Gregory La Cava

Oscar History: 4 nominations (Best Picture, Director, Supporting Actress-Andrea Leeds, Adapted Screenplay)

Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

The "more than five" window of the Best Picture race for the modern Oscars started in 2009, but it wasn't always like that.  Prior to 1944, the Best Picture race was a rotating number, peaking at one point with as many as 12 nominations for the category.  As a result, like today, you get some films that you wonder if they would've been nominated in a five-wide field or not.  That was one of the thoughts I had while watching Stage Door recently, a movie that features a cavalcade of major actresses, not just of that era but more so of the upcoming era; women like Lucille Ball, Eve Arden, & Ann Miller were all breaking out in a big way with this movie.  I was surprised after watching that the film had also been nominated for Best Director, not because it's not well-directed (it is) but because our modern preconceptions of films starring women (and the male-friendly AMPAS) is to assume such a picture can't score both, and thus be one of the "would've made it to five" films (which it appears Stage Door was).

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie is about a group of women who live in a boardinghouse, many of them aspiring actresses who are trying to land their lucky break.  A new girl, Terry (Hepburn) moves into the house, and her worldly attitude & love of Shakespeare make her an object of ridicule, particularly for Jean (Rogers), a wisecracking dancer who is forced to be her roommate.  It turns out that Terry doesn't need to be there-her father is very wealthy, and she's trying to strike out on her own against his wishes.  The two start to patch things up, and Terry befriends the rest of the girls including unlucky-in-love Judy (Ball), sarcastic Eve (Arden), and especially Kay (Leeds), who is desperate for a part in Anthony Powell's (Menjou) new play.  When Terry gets the part instead (initially on the wishes of her father, who is secretly backing the play in hopes of getting his daughter back after it fails), Kay, frustrated from unemployment & starving for her art, kills herself on opening night.  Terry, bereft from the grief, gives a good performance in the play, and becomes a star.  Despite this, she stays on at the boardinghouse, where her new family resides.

The film is unusual, in that it's clearly meant to be a fluffy, light comedy for the first hour, and then it takes a dark detour in its last few minutes.  The death of Kay is a left field twist, something I didn't really expect (I assumed she'd be rushed to a hospital & get the part that she was meant for that instead went to Hepburn's Terry).  It feels like a cheat to me, and one that kind of leaves a bitter taste in the movie, as it totally upends all of the fast-talking girls, and it feels like it's trying to teach the actresses a lesson that they didn't really deserve-they're just young women trying their best (and Terry's greatest sin was *GASP* being ambitious).  The death of Kay makes the film too off, and while it's still a good movie, it disappears some of the best attributes that made you fall in love with it in the first hour.

The film won four nominations, and three of them I don't have a problem with.  Like I said, this is a good movie, a great one in parts, but it's too sporadic & spastic in the way it handles the genre shift, and so it's simply a good movie.  The direction & writing is in a similar situation-good in both its comedic & dramatic shifts, but it can't combine the two.  Leeds, though, isn't the right fit.  Yes, her character is tragic, but that's all she is-there's no depth here.  It's hard to imagine someone looking at this performance and thinking "best in cast."  Obviously Ginger Rogers & Kate Hepburn aren't supporting parts, but they're both terrific.  Rogers is delicious, some of the best I've seen from her (Rogers was always better in comedy than in drama), and Hepburn is glorious, especially when she has to perform right after Kay's suicide.  If I had to pick a supporting player to honor from the movie, I might go with Eve Arden (though Lucille Ball is good in the role that put her on the map as a character player)-she's quintessential Arden (there's nothing to her Eve), but she (and her cat) steal every scene they do together.

Oscar's 15 Biggest Snubs

We're in the heat of Oscar season, and as someone who has been writing about the Oscars for seven years straight on this blog, I have written a lot of things about the Academy Awards.  I don't have access to insider information about the Oscars (even in an era of everything being on social media almost instantly, there's still something to be said for interviewing theoretical nominees or attending press events), so it's occasionally a slight challenge to come up with unique things to say about the Oscars, especially since we spend so much time in the past here and have done so many trivia articles through the years (plug time: if you're newer to this blog, peruse the tags on the side, especially "Lists" and "Official OVP Ballot" if you want to look at hundreds of different dissections of past Oscar races).

So color me surprised when I realized I've never done a list of the biggest Oscar snubs of all-time.  It's hard to corner down the biggest snubs ever in Oscars history, so we're going to focus today on the acting races, and a Top 15 list of performances.  This is obviously subjective, but below are the 15 best performances ever that I think most definitely should have been nominated for the Oscar, and in most cases, should've won the statue.

A couple of notes before you dive in.  First, you'll notice I don't repeat any movies, and that's on purpose.  A few of these films didn't get any Oscar love in any category, and so it'd be easy to put the entire ensemble on this list, but that'd be boring (I tried, and failed, to not duplicate actors as one person gave two performances I refused to ignore).  So Kim Novak or Charles Bronson, I see you and I'm sorry-know you'll also be nominated when the time comes.  Second, there are more men than women on this list, but that has less to do with qualitative dissections of film, and more to do with me agreeing more often with the Oscars on female performances than male.  And lastly, these are old movies.  While I could just as easily have come up with a list of 15 performances from the past decade Oscar should have noticed (and might well do that if I do any "Best of Decade" lists next year), only a couple of films on this list I think have had enough time to breathe for me to realize that they're "indisputable snubs."  With that said, dive in and fight me in the comments!

15. Andy Griffith (A Face in the Crowd)

A harrowing look at a man the world wants to just be simple, but instead is a malevolent, cruel creation, only someone who could portray "sweet as pie" like Andy Griffith could shock us all as Lonesome Rhodes (the obvious correlations to Trump 50 years before he'd become president are indisputable & petrifying).

14. Rita Hayworth (The Lady from Shanghai)

I wrote once that Rita Hayworth is the greatest actor of all-time to never be nominated for an Oscar, so you knew she'd show up here.  Her Rosalie is an enigma, the kind of woman that drives men mad...and while they're entranced she gets exactly what she wants.

13. Michael Stuhlbarg (Call Me by Your Name)

Yes, he should have gotten in for the speech alone.  But the speech wouldn't work without his subtle groundwork beforehand, watching his son endure love-and-loss in the same summer.  Stuhlbarg has been a reliable character actor for a decade now, but has never been so tender as CMBYN.

12. Orson Welles (The Third Man)

Harry Lime is everything we came to expect from Orson Welles.  Possibly the greatest actor of his generation (give or take Brando & Ingrid Bergman), Welles brings a devilish charm to Harry in The Third Man, almost making you forget that he's been gone for half of the picture, and once you realize what he's been up to, you understand why "devilish" is the right term for Welles' work.

11. Cary Grant (The Philadelphia Story)

Jimmy Stewart is a fine actor and lovely in The Philadelphia Story.  He's also giving the third best performance in the movie.  The best work in the film wasn't even nominated, with Cary Grant giving the finest acting of his long career, playing the most "Cary Grant" role ever, and defining the suave, delicious persona that would keep him a star for decades.

10. Marcello Mastroianni (8 1/2)

When I sit down with cinephiles, few directors inspire more argument than Fellini.  Hell, put me in front of a mirror and bring up Fellini, and I'll argue with myself.  But I will stand no assertion that 8 1/2 isn't perfect, and no performance in his filmography is as effective as Mastroianni's, breathing life into his wandering director.

9. Jeanne Moreau (Jules and Jim)

The two title characters can easily be pushed aside, because for anyone who has seen this movie, there is only Catherine.  A picture of romance, drama, comedy, and at parts even horror, Jeanne Moreau became one of the indisputable faces of the French New Wave with this gorgeous, chaotic free spirit.

8. Anthony Perkins (Psycho)

Perkins work in Psycho so often features on these kinds of lists, it borders on cliche.  But how do you deny such a fully-realized creation, a monster whose evil is easy to identify, but impossible to forgive?  Every detail in his performance comes to light with clarity upon repeat viewings, but you are still shocked by Norman's plans thanks to his handsome uneasiness.

7. John Wayne (The Searchers)

Anyone who says John Wayne can't act needs to watch The Searchers.  John Ford's magnum opus also puts the Duke in his most challenging and effective role, Ethan Edwards.  Wayne finds the heart in a cruel, inhuman (but all-too-real) man, wandering through the desert until he no longer understands what he's looking for...perhaps his own soul?

6. Katharine Hepburn (Bringing Up Baby)

Kate Hepburn was hardly at a loss for Oscar nominations-she was cited 12 times, and won 4.  That said, it still feels weird that the best thing Hepburn ever did in her career, her kooky Susan in Bringing Up Baby, somehow didn't get her nominated.  In the same year as her classic Holiday, was the Academy just not ready to admit they had a crush on the actress yet?

5. James Stewart (Vertigo)

If Cary Grant's going to take Best Actor in 1940, one could make a sincere argument that Jimmy Stewart should have won later for his Scotty Ferguson.  Vertigo was a financial disappointment, which is still no excuse for skipping the best work of this actor's career, as a man driven insane by lust, then heartbreak, and then just madness.

4. Brad Pitt (The Tree of Life)

Terrence Malick is always the star in a Terrence Malick picture-that's what the world-famous actors who sign up for his films are aware of when they take the job.  That said, Brad Pitt still manages to give one of the best auteur vessel performances I've ever seen as Mr. O'Brien, a man who would haunt his son's adulthood for decades in ways he couldn't understand.

3. Orson Welles (Touch of Evil)

Giving Stewart a run for his money is the other grand teton of 1958's Best Actor category, Orson Welles (I swear that's not a fat joke).  By this time Hollywood had no use for the former Boy Wonder, but that didn't stop him from making a movie like Touch of Evil, essentially the Unforgiven of film noir-his racist, corrupt detective pulled the mask off of what was lurking behind the Golden Age's treatment of the genre.

2. Henry Fonda (Once Upon a Time in the West)

Imagine casting Henry Fonda as a villain.  Nwo imagine him as a vicious man in black, with those piercing blue eyes staring down on a horrified Claudia Cardinale, and a ticking clock western where it's so well-structured you genuinely don't know who is getting out alive.  In a career where Oscar rarely called, this is Fonda's best work and more than earned him a trophy.

1. John Huston (Chinatown)

Huston's performance in Chinatown may be the best Supporting Actor performance, period.  His Noah Cross is a villain for the ages, able to conceal under his peculiar vocal cadence unmitigated evil, and justification for that evil as the movie unfolds.  Look at him, his head always turning, even as the credits role-Huston dazzles in Chinatown as if acting was what he was born for.

OVP: Quality Street (1937)

Film: Quality Street (1937)
Stars: Katharine Hepburn, Franchot Tone, Fay Bainter, Eric Blore, Cora Witherspoon
Director: George Stevens
Oscar History: 1 nomination (Best Original Score)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 4/5 stars

Growing up, one of my favorite discoveries was the fact that Katharine Hepburn is at her best when she's funny.  Between Bringing Up Baby and The Philadelphia Story, Hepburn surpassed her finest dramatic work and gave, in my opinion, her two very best performances.  This revelation was followed in turn by disappointment when it became apparent that these also happen to be two of the best films ever made, and Hepburn would occasionally flounder into overacting when given less structured or elegant humor.  As a result, I was not expecting Quality Street to bewitch me so ferociously when I caught it recently.  The film, based on JM Barrie's play, is a delight from start to finish, and features some prime Hepburn comedy.

(Spoilers Ahead) The plot to the picture itself is simple enough.  We have Phoebe (Hepburn), a young woman of some means who is in search of a bachelor, desperately in love with the local doctor, Valentine Brown (Tone).  Phoebe, however, cannot seem to tell Dr. Brown how she feels, and when he says he's off to fight in the Napoleonic Wars (when she thought he would propose), she assumes a life of spinsterhood.  Ten years pass, and Phoebe is dressed as an old maid, which surprises Dr. Brown, who says she's aged more than she expected, to which she's rightfully furious.  Phoebe then dresses in a beautiful gown and makeup, making herself look younger and passes herself off as her imaginary niece Livy.  Shenanigans ensue as Dr. Brown first is smitten with Livy, then realizes that he's actually in love with Phoebe, and all the while Phoebe and her sister Susan (Bainter) are trying to stave off the neighbors, who are certain that Phoebe and Livy are one-and-the-same.

If it sounds ridiculous, that's because it is.  The movie's plot is thin, and it's hard to imagine Dr. Brown not realizing instantly that Livy is Phoebe in disguise.  But once you move beyond that, this movie is actually quite delightful.  Hepburn and Tone are fine together, but it's really her chemistry with Bainter that sells the movie.  I loved every second of them trying to pull a fast one on their nosy neighbors, and their conviction that they will be able to both maintain the ruse and perhaps make their neighbors look the fools is marvelous.  Honestly-the film is filled with such lovely and delightful touches (even a very early-in-her-career cameo from Joan Fontaine), and at 83 minutes is deliciously spry, that you don't really care if you know exactly where it's going every step of the way.  Chart this one up in the Kate Hepburn comedic win column.

The film received one Oscar nomination, one of those truly random nominations for music that seemed to happen so often in the 1930's and 40's when studios could basically buy a nomination in the category there were so many nominees.  The actual score is omnipresent, accompanying almost every angle with bouncy strings and a playful attitude.  It's hardly groundbreaking or iconic, but it fits the movie itself like a glove, and it also led me to a picture I probably would have never seen otherwise (thus is the joy of the Oscar Viewing Project even if it thrusts upon me a movie like Suicide Squad in the same breath), so I'm grateful for the nomination even if it feels somewhat unearned.

Those are my thoughts on this charming little picture-has anyone else seen it?  If so, share your thoughts, and if not, please give me some of your favorite Kate Hepburn performances, either dramatic or comedic!

OVP: Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)

Film: Guess Who's Coming to Dinner (1967)
Stars: Spencer Tracy, Sidney Poitier, Katharine Hepburn, Katharine Houghton, Beah Richards, Roy E. Glenn, Cecil Kellaway
Director: Stanley Kramer
Oscar History: 10 nominations/2 wins (Picture, Director, Actor-Spencer Tracy, Actress-Katharine Hepburn*, Supporting Actor-Cecil Kellaway, Supporting Actress-Beah Richards, Original Screenplay*, Film Editing, Art Direction, Original Score)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

Sometimes when you're watching a movie you have to continually remind yourself that it was made almost fifty years ago.  The reality is that ideas in movies, particularly in films that were important socially, frequently become outdated and provincial the further you get from the issue.  The public evolves, and what was once groundbreaking no longer seems that way in the eyes of the audience.  It's why arguably the best social issue films are those that are as honest as possible, and in many ways skirt making it about "the issue" (Brokeback Mountain, for example, is hardly a "social issue" film at all, becoming more of a romance and a film simply about prejudice in general, which is something that unfortunately never seems to disappear).  Guess Who's Coming to Dinner doesn't have this foresight, instead focusing on the there-and-now.  That is forgivable (not all films have to be omnipotent) but seeing a dated plot combined with overacting and a script that can't decide whether it's funny or wants to have something serious to say is not forgivable, and this, one of the last four AFI's 100 Years films I had to see (I'll be done with the list in the next couple months or so-and yes, I picked a better-respected film to end the list), was a large disappointment considering its vaunted status as a film classic.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film follows John (Poitier) and Joanna (Houghton) as they decide to introduce themselves (they have recently been engaged) to their parents.  Joanna's parents Christina (Hepburn) and Matt (Tracy) are at first comically dumbfounded, and then after a while have a serious worry about the future of their daughter and her intended.  The same could be said for John's parents (Glenn and Richards).  In both cases the women are given to a more romantic impulsiveness while the men have a more practical sensibility.  The film continues with the same repeated argument over their happiness vs. their personal safety/future, before we get to the inevitable conclusion, with Matt providing a speech about how his love for Christina being a strong model for why the two should in fact get married.

The film is ridiculous for about every reason imaginable, but the first giant elephant in the room is that John and Joanna shouldn't get married, but it has absolutely nothing to do with race.  These two met each other eleven days prior, have a fourteen-year age gap, and have very few shared experiences.  Those are all perfectly reasonable objections, and one wonders why they made the story about them so impulsive-couldn't she have know him for a year or something like that?  I'm surprised in the entirety of the film that no one used that as a reason to object to the union-they haven't made it through an entire lunar cycle together, which is a sign that marriage should be off of the table.  The entire film seems predicated on the only objection being the race of the two individuals, when in fact that (even in 1967) shouldn't remotely be at the top of the list of parents should worry over.

The film also makes painstaking points to make the film more palatable to all audiences, but in the process declaws the entire film and makes it decidedly uninteresting.  The first is that Matt and Christina, the director insists, are not going to remotely be coming at this from a position of prejudice.  Perhaps Stanley Kramer wanted to play the Avenue Q "everyone's a little bit racist" card here, but it never comes across that way-we never seem to see Matt and Christina object because John is black, but only because their daughter and he will have a hard life.  It would have been more interesting if they'd spent some time with Matt focusing on the fact that if John were white, he'd be thrilled by the match.  And that's the other thing to take issue with in this movie-John is too perfect.  He's a wildly decorated medical doctor, frequently making trips to foreign countries to help needy children, an upstanding widower who is willing to sacrifice his own personal happiness for Joanna.  Forget the fact that he's too good for his flighty, impetuous fiance-he's too good for anyone.  I'm surprised Kate Hepburn didn't try to marry him herself.  The fact that they made him flawless helps the argument of why they should get married, but once again it sacrifices the real, which makes issue films dated-realism is key, and even if an issue becomes more for the history books than the headlines, a film will still be relevant if it remains honest.  Having John play the ultimate Manic Pixie Dream Guy is not doing that.

The film received ten Oscar nominations, a staggering number, though it's hard to explain why in hindsight.  The score is saccharine and overwrought, the screenplay has trouble with tone and consistently contradicts itself, the editing is nothing special (the most impressive part of it is the way that it tries to hide Spencer Tracy's clearly debilitating health), and the art direction is just a lush San Francisco home.  The film received a quartet of acting nominations, and I can't quite decide which one I support the most.  Arguably the most intriguing is Cecil Kellaway's as a family friend of Matt's who is trying to convince him the match is a sound one.  Kellaway, who had been nominated for an Oscar nineteen years earlier, is quite charming as a priest with a fondness for the bottle and who doesn't see what the hoopla is about, and while he's not giving great acting, his is the only comic portion of the film that doesn't feel glib.  Beah Richards, who made a career out of playing every African-American actor in Hollywood's mother at some point in her career, gets one gigantic speech to Spencer Tracy late in the film that feels wholly out-of-character and completely off-kilter (it's arguably the most out-of-place scene in the film), and the rest of the time she just sits and reacts to things-the role is a trite one, and Richards' delivery adds nothing to the role.  It feels like a throwaway nomination in a weak year for that category (though a strong one everywhere else-1967 being one of cinema's best years) for a longtime character actress.

The leading pair is hard to judge.  You don't get much more storied than Spencer Tracy and Kate Hepburn, particularly when they're together, and it's hard not to be impressed by the incredible backstory of the making of this film (with Hepburn and director Stanley Kramer putting their salaries on the line to get the studio to back the making of the film, as Tracy was so ill that he died several dies after shooting ended).  The tears in the final soliloquy may be Kate's best most in the film, but it's hard not to see them as tears for Tracy, not for her fictional Matt.  Otherwise they are trading on their most indisputable talents (Hepburn's ability with timing and Tracy's Broadway-engrained stage presence) with little else to lend itself.  Hepburn could play this role in her sleep, and yet frequently doesn't seem to get the motives of her character.  Considering she was up against Faye Dunaway's Bonnie Parker and Anne Bancroft's Mrs. Robinson, two of the most iconic characters in the movies, it feels like sentiment won her that second Oscar more than anything else, as she's been far better before and is, while always watchable, boring and listless in this role.  Tracy, whom I have less of a passion for than Hepburn, seems to float too much from opinion-to-opinion, relying heavily on the disjointed script without making any sort of personal assumptions about his own character or trying to do some of the heavy lifting.  As a result his Matt is a contradiction, and not a good one.

We'll end there, but I'm hoping you have thoughts on this film, one of the few "classics" I've never seen but I'm guessing you have.  If so, share in the comments!

Oscar Trivia: The Quest for Six Decades

An Oscar nomination is a truly amazing moment in an actor's career.  For many, it's the moment they have dreamt of all of their lives-the culmination of years of work, determination, and a little bit of luck when just the right fates align and nab them their career high point.

And for most Oscar nominees, that's it.  If I remember my statistics right, it's about 65% of all Oscar nominees for acting will only get that one nomination, that one moment in the sun that will be in the first two lines of their obituary.  And that's great-we'll get to all of you in the OVP (or we've already gotten to you, in which case don't get greedy).

But for other actors, that one Oscar nomination is hardly enough, and they want more.  Some of these actors enjoy quick bursts of nominations like Renee Zellweger or Russell Crowe, but we're going to focus today on people who have managed to sustain decades of Oscar stamina.

It's actually extremely rare to be able to be nominated at least one time in four different decades, and even rarer to pull it off consecutively.  Since we're about to hit the decade's halfway point (can you believe that?!?), this is the perfect time to see who is on-track to continue their streaks and who might be in trouble.

Before we start, let's go through the people who have passed on and are no longer in the running but hit 4 or 5 decades (as the title alludes to, no one has hit six...and yes, this is a trivia article so if I missed an actor, share in the comments below).

Five Decades in a Row: Laurence Olivier (1930's-70's)
Five Decades Non-Consecutively: Katharine Hepburn (1930's-1980's, no 70's), Paul Newman (1950's-00's, no 70's as well)
Four Decades in a Row: Bette Davis (1930's-60's), Jack Lemmon (1950-80's), Geraldine Page (1950's-80's),
Four Decades Non-Consecutively: Mickey Rooney (1930's-70's, no 60's), Peter O'Toole (1960's-00's, no 90's)...both of whom never won competitive Oscars though they both won Honorary ones

Again, it's a short list, and one that has gotten considerably longer as the stars of the 1960's have stuck around further than was typical with stars of yore.  We'll start out with those actors that are still living and have already hit three decades.

Waiting for the Fourth...

Of the thirteen living actors who have been nominated in three separate decades for acting awards (and for the record, the year the film came out is the beginning of the decade-none of this "Google Search Driving Miss Daisy won the 1990 Oscars" crap), some actually have to wait a few more years before they can try again as their third nomination came in the 2010's and they can't get another decade under their belt for a few more years.  Most of these actors did this in the 1990's, 2000's, and 2010's: Brad Pitt, Judi Dench, Cate Blanchett, and Annette Bening all have nominations in each of the past three decades (it's worth noting that Bening is the only one of these four actors who doesn't have an Oscar, and is one of only two actors who have hit more than three that is still alive without an Oscar-I'm just saying AMPAS, but keep that in mind in a few years when you're handing out Honoraries and Bening is still empty-handed).  The only non-consecutive actor who has scored this decade would be Sally Field, who took a 28-year gap between her second and third nods, and did this oddly with only three nominations (Lincoln, her most recent nod, is her only loss to date).  And though it's hardly worth listing all of the actors who have two decades behind them, at least a trio of theoretical threats this year (Julianne Moore, Hilary Swank, and Marisa Tomei) could potentially join this list.

There are eight other actors, however, who could well reach their fourth decade citation in upcoming years.  Most promising of the bunch would be Robert Duvall, who is actually on most people's projections for a nomination later this year with The Judge (though Duvall has come extremely close to grabbing a nomination before with Get Low in 2010 and came up short so he may miss again).  Duvall is in the majority in not having consecutive decades: he's joined by Jodie Foster (who hasn't been nominated in twenty years), Sissy Spacek (who skipped the 90's), Ellen Burstyn (who also skipped the 90's), and Al Pacino (who skipped the Aughts).  All of these actors work fairly consistently, though Burstyn is more about television these days and Pacino is more about cashing in on his once grand legacy as an actor.  Still, though, if Robert de Niro can randomly get nominated for Silver Linings Playbook, anyone can come out of awards show retirement.

Only three actors are working on the slightly more impressive four consecutive decades: Ben Kingsley, Morgan Freeman, and Holly Hunter.  Freeman and Kingsley work consistently and constantly, and Kingsley in particular is the sort of actor who gets nominated every time there's something prestigious about his work (he also has that feel of an actor who may score one last supporting win to get two trophies).  Hunter has long since been relegated to television (she got her third-in-a-row for a supporting role in Thirteen in something of a comeback, and you only get so many of those).  Still, these are actors to be on the lookout for in coming years to see if they can continue their respective streaks.

Waiting for a Fifth...

Once again, we can start out with five actors who have already scored their 2010's hit and are now just biding their time until they can try again.  Two of these actors have done five decades (shockingly) non-consecutively (which means they very well could have been in the running for six if they'd had a little more luck in a certain year).  Jeff Bridges skipped the 1990's (missing for The Fisher King) and Robert de Niro missed the Aughts (probably getting closest for Meet the Parents...though admittedly not too close).  The other three actors, though, have hit every decade since the 1980's consecutively: Julia Roberts, Denzel Washington, and Daniel Day-Lewis (all, oddly enough, nominated in 1989), and have already gotten this decade crossed off.  Day-Lewis has notably won in three of those four decades.

Another twelve actors have scored four decades and are on the search for a fifth.  They range from actors who are constantly churning out films to actors who have largely retired from the cinema but are thankfully still kicking.  Though many of these actors scored their nominations consecutively, only one of the dozen is currently on a streak: that would be Diane Keaton, who has scored a nomination every decade since the 1970's (and only one nomination per decade, it's worth pointing out).  Keaton rarely challenges herself since Something's Gotta Give, but she's the sort of actor who bides her time until something brilliant randomly comes along and everyone remembers how much they love her.

Other working actors that could make it include busy actors such as Jon Voight (who skipped the 1990's despite constantly making movies since his big break in Midnight Cowboy), Shirley MacLaine (who, had she scored for Postcards from the Edge as she was expected to, would be a column down), Vanessa Redgrave (her botched campaigns for Atonement and Coriolanus actually mean that she could well have had the record by now!), Dustin Hoffman (who continues to make enough films often enough that he should be able to pull this off in a surprise supporting role, despite missing the Aughts), and of course Dame Maggie Smith (who skipped the 1990's, but came roaring back in the past ten years as a genuine box office draw and nearly won a citation for The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel a couple of years ago).  The only one with a legit shot this year appears to be Smith, who has what could be a sleeper hit later this fall in My Old Lady (in a weak Best Actress year her name could be enough, and she's my dark horse contender for a nomination).

Other actors who are looking for a fifth don't work as often or are notoriously curmudgeonly about working again.  Joanne Woodward (not nominated since 1990, but extending all the way back to the 1950's with her streak, the earliest nomination for a living person in this article) rarely works anymore, and Gene Hackman (who missed for The Royal Tenenbaums due to category confusion, costing him his fifth consecutive citation) is happily retired.  Albert Finney (who missed the 1990's) hates the Oscars and only does bit parts these days, though he's the other actor (aside from Bening) who is living and has hit the 3+ decade counter, so he'd also be a decent contender for an Honorary Award (that he'd never show up for it in a million years).  Warren Beatty keeps claiming that he'll make another movie (that long-rumored Howard Hughes biopic is the stuff of cinematic legend), but I'll believe it when I can hold a ticket for the film (my plan is to see it as a double feature with Flora Plum)-he missed the Aughts but made it back to the 1960's with Bonnie and Clyde.  And finally there is Julie Christie, who has resumed working if not necessarily in major cinematic work.  She skipped the 1980's and bizarrely has only received one nomination in each decade she's been cited in (much like Keaton).

Waiting for a Sixth...

As the stats above corroborate, getting a sixth is damn hard work, as there's a reason no one has done it.  Kate Hepburn probably could have had she done more significant film work in the 1970's, but she spent most of that time on the stage, and she's probably the only one who has come close until now.  Three living actors have pulled off five decades in a row, and one in particular seems determined to break yet another of Hepburn's records (not settling for a tie).

Meryl Streep is the only actor who has managed to pull off a 2010 nomination already and have five in a row.  Streep, it's worth noting, is also the only actor to have more than one nomination in five different decades (Olivier getting Rebecca made a year too late), a record that may stand for infinity (of all of the living actors we've profiled, Robert Duvall is the only other actor who has gotten more than two in each of his eligible decades, and he's twenty years behind Streep and is 83-years-old).  Streep will need to continue her current stamina to hit the goal, but at this rate she could well take it in the 2020's (she'll only be in her seventies).

That is if one of the two other living actors don't go for the title first.  Both have received consecutive nominations since the 1960's, and at least one is still working.  Michael Caine, an actor you don't always think of for such lists, got his first nomination in 1966, then got cited in 1972, 1983, 1986, 1999, and 2002, and despite being 81, continues to work constantly (he'll be in the highly-anticipated Interstellar later this year) and has made no secret about his desire to win a third Oscar for a leading role.  Just one nomination would land him the record, and put Streep in a difficult position-2030 is a long way to go to actually beat this title outright.

The other person is the recently retired Jack Nicholson, who made his last film four years ago and claims he is done with cinema.  I don't want to call Jack a liar, but part of me wonders if his best friend Warren Beatty couldn't talk him out of that self-imposed exile to do a showy supporting role in that long-gestating Hughes biopic (surely Beatty's final film?) and get one last nomination.  Either way, it's hard to deny he's had a spectacular career.

And there you have it folks-a morning's dose of Oscar trivia.  Do you think that Streep, Caine, or Nicholson could take the record?  Who will be the next person to score four or five decades' worth of nominations?  Share in the comments!

AFI's 25 Greatest Actresses, Part 1

So, with the recent death of Lauren Bacall, the American Film Institute's list of living "greatest actors" just got one person shorter.  Created in 1999, and for only actors who made their film debuts after 1950 (or had already passed away at the time), the list at the time was already pretty short on still-living members (only nine including the men), but is now down to three, and just one of those in females.

So in honor of this list, and Ms. Bacall, I thought it would be a cool idea to do a rundown of the actors on it, and my favorite of their performances.  This is partly both a public service and a personal bit of a shaming.  One of the sadder things that happened to me yesterday while discussing Ms. Bacall's passing was that I realized that most people I was talking to about her had never heard of her.  This is sad not only because modern cinema doesn't celebrate its past enough (cough, the Governors Awards, cough), but also because they are missing out on Ms. Bacall's work.  However, while I am certainly aware of all of the women on this list, I will admit heartily that I haven't extensively been watching most of their filmographies, and most of them have at least one major glaring miss from me in their filmography.  As a result, my Netflix queue (and hopefully yours) is going to be a lot fuller when all of this is done.  Let's start, and in anti-climactic list reading fashion, we're going to start at the top of the list instead of the bottom (they're all legends, why not mix it up as a result?).

1. Katharine Hepburn (1907-2003)

Oscar Nominations: 12, with four wins for Morning Glory, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner, The Lion in Winter, and On Golden Pond
Probably Best Known Today For: Hepburn's warbling voice is oft-imitated, and I'm guessing that today she's best known for that rather than an actual film role.  If it is a film role, it's likely On Golden Pond, which was a HUGE success in 1981 (the second highest-grossing film of the year after Raiders-it beat Superman II, can you imagine that happening today?!?).
My Favorite Performance: This is a tough one, as Kate's one of the few actors on this list that I've seen a boatload of her movies.  I'd probably have to go with Bringing Up Baby over The Philadelphia Story, though (even though I like the latter film better) since Hepburn is just on all cylinders in that film (the jailhouse scene still leaves me in stitches).
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: This is the part of the post where I reel out certain missing elements of my cinematic credentials.  I have seen eight of Hepburn's Best Actress-nominated performances, but probably the most famous that I'm missing is Guess Who's Coming to Dinner.  It's been considered quite dated and not as good by modern audiences, but there's no denying that it certainly has a pop culture cache, so I'll go with that one.

2. Bette Davis (1908-1989)

Oscar Nominations: 10 nominations, with two wins for Dangerous and Jezebel
Probably Best Known Today For: ...Having those Bette Davis eyes.  Kim Carnes immortalized Davis in a way few of her films ever could for Generation X, but cinematically she remains forever Margo Channing, fascinating her seatbelt for a bumpy night.
My Favorite Performance: I could be provocative and pick one of her other truly strong performances (Davis was the Meryl Streep of her day, for context), but you just cannot beat All About Eve.  The phrase "she was born to play that role" is a hackneyed cliche, but I'll be damned if it isn't true here.  Claudette Colbert was originally slated to play the part, but she had to back out due to an injury, and Bette Davis gloriously filled in.
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: I'm missing a few of her Oscar-nominated roles, the most glaring of which is probably Dark Victory, a performance that probably would have won her a third Oscar before even Walter Brennan got there were it not for some Civil War film where the main character has the same name as a color.

3. Audrey Hepburn (1929-1993)

Oscar Nominations: 5 nominations, winning competitively for Roman Holiday and eventually winning the Jean Thalberg Humanitarian Award.  Hepburn would also receive the EGOT, the only actress on this list to do so.
Probably Best Known Today For: Her incomparable style (she's still regularly featured in ads for fashion houses) and Breakfast at Tiffany's, one of those few classics that has transcended generations in terms of its cultural significance.
My Favorite Performance: Holly Golightly is a tough act to beat, and I'm not going to try.  Her work in Breakfast was complicated, airy, with just enough of a scent of melancholy to keep the film grounded in Truman Capote's original story.
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: I have seen all but one of her Oscar nominated roles (I'm missing The Nun's Story), and I've actually seen most of her most significant non-nominated work (this is probably the most complete of all of the filmographies we're going to discuss today), so I'll go with that.

4. Ingrid Bergman (1915-1982)

Oscar Nominations: 7 nominations, winning three of them in one of the best track records in the history of the Oscars (she won for Gaslight, Anastasia, and Murder on the Orient Express
Probably Best Known Today For: Casablanca, one of the truly iconic classic films and one of those few films that is thrown around as an indisputable high point of the art form (in the same way War and Peace is for the novel).
My Favorite Performance: Casablanca is my favorite film, and she's my favorite performance in it, so you do the math here.  Bergman has long been one of my favorite actresses because she brought that quiet, introverted acting style that is so celebrated now to life much earlier in her career than most people did.  She's also, in my opinion, the most beautiful woman in all of classic cinema (give or take Rita Hayworth).
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: This is one of the final actors before I start ducking my head for cover and wondering if I can call myself a movie fan, as I've seen most of Bergman's most significant work.  From a curiosity standpoint you cannot beat Bergman meets Bergman in Autumn Sonata, but I think the most important film I haven't seen from her is For Whom the Bell Tolls.

5. Greta Garbo (1905-1990)

Oscar Nominations: Garbo received three nominations in her career (though four...kind of; back in the day you could be nominated for more than one film), but never won a competitive Oscar.  She did receive an Honorary Oscar in 1954, though she didn't show up to receive it (it was mailed to her house).
Probably Best Known Today For: Wanting to be alone.  Garbo's films have largely gone by the wayside in the public consciousness, but she herself remains an iconic figure of reclusion and thespian mystery.
My Favorite Performance: I have seen none of Garbo's most iconic roles, so I will go with the one Oscar-nominated performance of hers I have seen, Romance.
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: Where to begin?  Probably with Camille, which is considered her greatest performance and got her her second Oscar nomination.  And considering she landed a nod in 1939, generally considered the greatest of all movie years, Ninotchka surely should also be mentioned.

6. Marilyn Monroe (1926-1962)

Oscar Nominations: One of the only actors on this entire list with no history with Oscar, Monroe never received a nomination or a win.  She did win a Golden Globe for Some Like It Hot, however.
Probably Best Known Today For: Never having left us.  No other actress on this list can remotely compare to Monroe in the ways that they have permeated modern pop culture.  She's still on billboards, in advertisements, and sold as poster art.  Andy Warhol helped, but pretty much every pop culture scribe has at some point gone to the Marilyn well for inspiration.  Most people would struggle to name one of her actual movies, but everyone knows HER.
My Favorite Performance: Of course it would be Some Like It Hot, which is one of the greatest screwball comedies ever made and Monroe is dynamite as Sugar Kane, the ukulele player.
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: Unlike most of the public, I've actually seen most of Monroe's most significant work.  Probably the biggest miss would be The Seven Year Itch, which contains her iconic white dress subway scene.

7. Elizabeth Taylor (1932-2011)

Oscar Nominations: 5 nominations, including two competitive wins for Butterfield 8 and Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?; like Audrey Hepburn, Taylor also won the Jean Hersholt Humanitarian Award, getting her Oscar count up to three.
Probably Best Known Today For: Her many marriages.  Taylor was married eight times and was a tabloid sensation, most notably for her two marriages to Richard Burton.  Taylor also became hugely identified with AIDS research in the 1980's and is perhaps the celebrity best known for her advocacy for HIV-infected people.
My Favorite Performance: It's tough to top what she did as Martha in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, and I'm not going to try-that is a performance that has to be seen to be believed, and she heartily deserved her Oscar citation.
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: I've actually seen most of Liz's most significant work, though I'm missing two big ones: National Velvet, her most iconic role as a child, and Cleopatra, the film that nearly bankrupt 20th Century FOX.

8. Judy Garland (1922-1969)

Oscar Nominations: 2 nominations for A Star is Born and Judgment at Nuremberg, though she lost for both.  Garland did pick up a Juvenile Award for The Wizard of Oz/Babes in Arms in 1939, though.
Probably Best Known Today For: The Wizard of Oz is a classic that every generation encounters on television, and Garland's Dorothy Gale is the heart of that story.  She's also the pinup for the "tragic child actor" story, as her work has long been overshadowed by her personal demons with drugs and booze.
My Favorite Performance: Definitely A Star is Born, which is really one of those brilliant art-imitating-life situations (Garland herself would become a tragically forgotten Hollywood star), and she just nails every aspect of this really superb movie (particularly that unforgettable intro in "The Man That Got Away").
Glaring Miss in Her Filmography: Garland has three truly iconic films, and I have viewed all of them (the other being Meet Me in St. Louis, for those keeping track at home), so I have to go with the B-work.  I could pick Nuremberg, but she's got such a small part in that so I'll instead pick one of the MGM classics, Easter Parade.

And we'll end there and make this a three-parter.  It's now time to confess-which of these women do you love and worship and which of these ladies do you have glaring misses in their filmography (or gulp, maybe haven't seen them in anything?).  Share in the comments!