Post by urbanpatrician on Aug 18, 2020 8:31:20 GMT
Rewatching some 70s stuff has made me come across these 2 inadvertently.
I think I prefer Keaton. I give Fonda way more nods and wins.... 5 nods and 2 wins vs only like..... 1 for Keaton. Well maybe..... 2, that one little weak supporting actress nod for Manhattan hanging on in one of the weakest categories of all time.
I think Keaton just had more star quality and she's more sympathetic and more expressive and magnetic. I think she can fit in any era, she would be a bit more of a romantic in the 90s tho, but I think 90s-ness fits her even better than the 70s she was born into. Fonda is obviously quite good though, and was nominated 7 whole times which is equal to Ingrid Bergman, and quite impressive.
She appeared very promising bursting on with They Shoot Horses, Don't They? but I thought Susannah York was the sight to behold in that one. But still, it's among her best but in that really strong Best Actress Lineup of 1969 it suddenly doesn't seem so strong anymore. I give her 2 wins for The Dollmaker and Spirits of the Dead, but both in historically weak categories and I don't feel like I love her that much in those. In On Golden Pond she was very solid. However, the one time where I felt she was completely in command and wasn't OWNED by any of her co-stars was in Julia....that's her best work. Don't much care for her other nominations.
For Diane Keaton, she obviously has the advantage of being cast in a whole slew of classics from 1972-1981. I personally don't think that has any relevance, being in the right place at the right time. I don't think her performances stand out in The Godfather movies or some Woody Allen movies, but I really felt she should've taken home gold for Reds, she reached a real highpoint with that one. I wouldn't mind her give her actual Oscar win to Fonda for '77, and for Hepburn to give Keaton hers in '81.
What says you pacinoyes? This is like your stomping ground.
I think I prefer Keaton. I give Fonda way more nods and wins.... 5 nods and 2 wins vs only like..... 1 for Keaton. Well maybe..... 2, that one little weak supporting actress nod for Manhattan hanging on in one of the weakest categories of all time.
I think Keaton just had more star quality and she's more sympathetic and more expressive and magnetic. I think she can fit in any era, she would be a bit more of a romantic in the 90s tho, but I think 90s-ness fits her even better than the 70s she was born into. Fonda is obviously quite good though, and was nominated 7 whole times which is equal to Ingrid Bergman, and quite impressive.
She appeared very promising bursting on with They Shoot Horses, Don't They? but I thought Susannah York was the sight to behold in that one. But still, it's among her best but in that really strong Best Actress Lineup of 1969 it suddenly doesn't seem so strong anymore. I give her 2 wins for The Dollmaker and Spirits of the Dead, but both in historically weak categories and I don't feel like I love her that much in those. In On Golden Pond she was very solid. However, the one time where I felt she was completely in command and wasn't OWNED by any of her co-stars was in Julia....that's her best work. Don't much care for her other nominations.
For Diane Keaton, she obviously has the advantage of being cast in a whole slew of classics from 1972-1981. I personally don't think that has any relevance, being in the right place at the right time. I don't think her performances stand out in The Godfather movies or some Woody Allen movies, but I really felt she should've taken home gold for Reds, she reached a real highpoint with that one. I wouldn't mind her give her actual Oscar win to Fonda for '77, and for Hepburn to give Keaton hers in '81.
What says you pacinoyes? This is like your stomping ground.
