Does Frances McDormand deserve three Oscars???

She absolutely deserved the Oscar for Fargo and given how weak the competition was in 2018,she probably deserved it for Three Billboards too.But Nomadland?.No.She should only have 2 Oscars right now.

She deserved all three imo.

Her wins aren't bad, but in all three years there's at least one better nominee in the lot imo.

Her film career is closer to Walter Brennan (look him up. He also has 3 Oscars for acting) than most of the other 3 time winners in that like Brennan, she always felt more like a respected character/supporting actress on film than a great leading star. So her having 3 Best Actress Oscars does feel like an outlier on the surface of things. But who gives a shit really. Hillary Swank has two Oscars and Glenn Close, Sigourney Weaver and Michelle Pfieffer have none. Swank's career is not held in the same esteem as any of them. McDormand is a great actress, and to be honest, she has some time to seem less of an outlier if she keeps racking up great leading parts. The Tragedy Of Macbeth seems a very good step in that direction.

Anyone who doesn't like Leigh in Waterloo Bridge doesn't have a soul . She's magnificent and heartbreaking in that movie. imho.

Leigh is a much different animal. Not only are her two Oscar winning performances held up as two of the best screen performances of all-time (I don't think any of McDormand's wins are held in that  kind of regard), she was leading lady with a very small filmography. Only 19 film credits (A lot of them minor ones before Gone With The Wind). Her legend is in part based on her selectivity. She is closer to someone like Montgomery Clift or Daniel Day-Lewis, who also had small filmographies compared to the majority of their peers. Some people also felt Laurence Olivier also conspired to prevent Leigh from accepting more film roles (to do stage with him) as he might have been envious of her greater facility for film acting. Leigh turned down a lot of movies during her marriage to Olivier. She could conceivably have won 3 Oscars herself if she took more roles on film.

My feelings exactly. I like her alot, but if she had zero Oscars I wouldn't consider it any  kind of travesty. 

I don't quite understand what you're talking about because, again, I do not consider her limited and see all three of her winning performances as completely different beasts. The comedy and innocence and determination of "Fargo", the bulldozer-like force and anger of "Three Billboards" and the poignancy and hopeful heartbreak of "Nomadland" (delivered mostly through wordless acting) are three different realms in my view, and are absolutely worthy of that prestigious '3 time winner' status. So I'm not looking at "Macbeth" as some sort of an upcoming proof of her range because she's already proven it to me many a time. 

It's kind of a ridiculous argument. It's not as if anybody ever asked Jack Nicholson to pull off Shakespeare. 

I think the biggest issue some have with McDormand is that so many of her roles have been essentially thankless. She has been so often cast in character parts that don't require her to be great (but just need her to be competent, which she always is), that I think the impression many have is that she only stood out in her Oscar winning stuff (and some people don't even rate some of those performances). She just hasn't had the same type of opportunities for consistently great roles that some of these legends she is being compared to now took for granted. Her range is fine, but I can see why she seems odd as a three time winner. In the same way Hilary Swank might feel a bit odd as a two-time winner.

1996: Both Watson and Blethyn were better. Watson should've won.

2017: Of the nominees I preferred both Robbie and Hawkins (though just marginally). Outside the Oscar nominees Pugh (Lady Macbeth) and Krieps (Phantom Thread) are my personal top 2.

2020: My favourite of her 3 wins but Mulligan should've won, and I also preferred Kirby over her.

Fair enough  - like I said I agree with you in the general sense  but not relative to those 5 that she shares a stat with .......I'm a big fan - but franklin's point is a valid one - in that it's not an unheard of criticism of her in the general sense - like I said - it came up on this board in the Macbeth thread - it's come up irl.......I mean people are clutching their pearls (not you) at the criticism - you can call it valid or invalid but it does come up irl........

I actually think McDormand's three winning performances are far more varied than Nicholson's or Bergman's, for instance. Although if we're talking about careers in general, that's a whole other deal.

It's interesting to witness this McDormand 3-time thing happening right now with our own eyes - someone like the OP may think that she's not deserving of this amount because she's not an all-time performer in their eyes, but none of us now how she's gonna be perceived in the future (which is a key factor in determining who's an all-timer or not). I can picture many many years from now some descendants of ours sitting on "Movie Awards Dux Dux Redudux" and making yet another one of those 'Who was the GOAT' threads and McDormand coming up time and time again because by then she'll already be firmly established and remembered as a 3-time acting winner (like how we look at Bergman because none of us saw her wins happen in real time, except maybe for you, pacinoyes!) which will make her easier to perceive as an all-timer as opposed to how we're processing it right here when this moment is happening.