Bette Davis gave a very good performance in "What ever Happened to Baby Jane?" I love that movie so much and she was just great! She really deserved it. Not saying Anne Bancroft was bad, but seriously the best actress award was for Bette i am really upset she did not win.
Anyone else agree that Bette Davis deserved the Oscar more that year?
WARNING: I'M SEXY!
Bette was great and deserved her nom but I really think Anne Bancroft deserved the Oscar.
shareTough call. Bette's performance as always, was 110%. But looking at the two films, the Helen Keller story was going to be favored. Maybe Bette should have played Annie Sullivan.
But looking back at Anne Bancroft's performance, she is Annie.
I think it worked out the only way it could have.
Always the officiant, never the bride. http://www.withthiskissitheewed.com
Sorry, but I'm too biased as Bette is a "hometown girl" (that is we were both born in Lowell MA).
shareNo way...I admire and respect Bette Davis very much but Anne Bancroft deserved her oscar. More questionable to me in restrospect is Patty Duke's Oscar, not that she wasnt wonderful, but Angela Lansbury gave one of the great performances of all time in the Manchurian Candidate....
It is not our abilities that show who we truly are...it is our choices
'that is we were both born in Lowell MA'.
---------------------
I'm from Lowell
I agree. I felt Bette as Baby Jane was not like watching someone acting at all. She was for that film the character. The fanfare behind the movie i feel is what kept her from winning, and possibly her other wins. The Miracle worker was bound to win, but i think the performances were too self-conscious. It took alot of guts for Bette Davis to play such a rotten person but her ability to bring humanity to the role and playing it 'for real' made her sympathetic. In lesser hands baby jane would have been a caricature. In my opinion WEHTBJ and The Star are her greatest performances and should have won for both.
share"In my opinion WEHTBJ and The Star are her greatest performances and should have won for both."
Her greatest performance, in my opinion is as Margo Channing in All About Eve!
I agree! I am not a big fan of any of these actresses but I don't think Anne was impressive at all.
Actually this movie irritated me so much! On the other hand, Baby Jane is a master piece and Bette was great in it.
Bette certainly agreed with you that she deserved the oscar. I remember her on a talk show stating with regard to her "Baby Jane" loss, "I was robbed!"
shareBette Davis had other opportunities to win, and did, but a film like Miracle Worker only comes along once in a lifetime, and to have not awarded those involved would have been a disservice to both the actors and those who the story was based on...
What Ever Happened to Baby Jane was Davis's last nomination and opportunity. A movie like that also doesn't come along a lot.
shareThe votes may had very close; it would be intriguing to know how close it was. This is why it's hard to take the AA seriosuly. If the actor wins by one vote, isn't it less significant? I think they should have a margin of votes to claim a tie.
share100% agree....Bette deserved the Oscar, but Anne winning it wasn't a bad selection.
What is bad is the garbage movie that won the Oscar for best picture in 1962.
Either To Kill a Mockingbird or What Ever Happened (which wasn't even nominated) should have won.. Even The Miracle Worker would have been a better selection
I admire Bette David and thought she was terrific in Whatever Happened to Baby Jane. BUT I really think Anne Bancroft deserved this Oscar. She was amazing. The entire scene with she and Patty where she is trying to get the child to eat with a spoon is inspiring all by itself. She played Annie beautifully and without fault.
share'What is bad is the garbage movie that won the Oscar for best picture in 1962'.
-----------------
garbage movie?
100% agree....Bette deserved the Oscar, but Anne winning it wasn't a bad selection.
_________
62' was an exceptionally strong year for leading ladies; but I feel that Bancroft had this one in the bag. Her character, compared to her other 4 competitors, was inspiring. The other 4 characters, were either alcoholic, drug addicted, mentally unstable and sex addicted. They are not always to the academy's taste.
Davis, had commented something of the sort, that she built her character up from the roots, whereas Bancroft had performed hers a myriad of times, on the stage. It would have been nice for Davis to have won, for such a 'classic' performance in a classic film; but she likely felt she deserved to win too. She already had 2 Oscars, her character wasn't 'nice' and for those reasons, her nomination was likely always going to be her win. We don't know, who was runner up either. It may not have been Davis.
Davis, had commented something of the sort, that she built her character up from the roots, whereas Bancroft had performed hers a myriad of times, on the stage.This is a rather stupid statement on Davis' part. So what if Bancroft came into the filming already knowing her character? Why should she be penalized for that? She also had to build Annie Sullivan "up from the roots" when she first performed the role on the stage. What matters (or what should matter) for Oscar voters is what's on film, period, not the process leading up to it.
[deleted]