Anybody else think Kim Bassinger didn't deserve the Oscar?

Yeah, Kim Basinger was well cast and gave a decent performance, but I wouldn't consider it Oscar worthy unless there was virtually zero competition in her category that year. That Oscar should've gone to Julianne Moore, who gave a great performance in Boogie Nights.

Honestly if it was up to me I wouldn't have even bothered giving her the nomination that year. Bridget Fonda in Jackie Brown or Heather Graham in Boogie Nights stood out to me more than Basinger did in LA confidential. And it really doesn't seem right that she received the only acting nomination in this cast when she gave by far the weakest performance. It seems 1998 was a crowded year at the Oscars.

Yeah well Annie Hall didn't deserve best picture so when you have a group of people deciding who wins these awards that other people are going to disagree with them than the awards really don't mean anything.

Kim just happened to be in a very good film, she wasnt bad, but wasnt amazing either. Julianne Moore should have won for Boogie Nights.

This MOVIE should have gotten the Best Picture Oscar, and not the lachrymose Titanic. I have LA Confidential in my movie library. I will never watch Titanic a second time.

Yeah i think both Gloria Stewart and Juliane Moore were better

https://www.datalounge.com/thread/25412034-worst-best-supporting-actress-winner-or-nominee

Kim Basinger in L.A. Confidential (1997): Another example of a previously unacclaimed actress finally giving a better than average performance in an immediate classic film; the hilarious Joan Cusack in In & Out or even Gloria Stuart in Titanic would've been better choices.

—Anonymous
reply 2 19 hours ago

She did not deserve it. Basinger is flat to the point of almost being amateurish.

I never realized she won. I love this movie. I can't say weather she should have won or not, just want to say I'm surprised she was even nominated. It was an average performance.