Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2021 15:25:44 GMT
Helen Mirren has won an Oscar and a Tony for her portrayal(s). Claire Foy and Olivia Colman have won Emmys for theirs. Imelda Staunton is waiting in the wings... Across all mediums, this role (moreso than any other, it seems!) is particularly hard to beat.  |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Oct 29, 2021 15:38:11 GMT
Cyrano de Bergerac netted Jose Ferrer a Tony and an Oscar, Christopher Plummer a Tony, and Gerard Depardieu bagged a few prizes himself (Cannes, Cesar). We'll see what Dinklage can do.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mattsby on Oct 29, 2021 15:49:39 GMT
Churchill maybe …. Lithgow, Brendan Gleeson, Albert Finney all won Emmys. Oldman won Oscar. Robert Hardy and Simon Ward BAFTA nom’d. Dozens of other acclaimed portrayals too.
|
|
|
|
Post by hugobolso on Oct 29, 2021 18:03:57 GMT
Jackie O. specially on TV.-
|
|
lilibet
New Member
Posts: 175 
Likes: 109
|
Post by lilibet on Oct 30, 2021 2:01:06 GMT
Can't go wrong with Lizzie.
|
|
|
|
Post by MsMovieStar on Oct 30, 2021 15:09:49 GMT
 Oh honey, I couldn't help it! |
|
|
|
Post by fiosnasiob on Oct 30, 2021 19:53:08 GMT
Yeah it has becomes an impressive awards magnet role. Elizabeth I is also a pretty decent awards winning role, Judi Dench won an oscar (and I argue Blanchett should have won that year too), Mirren won an Emmy, so did (my fav) Glenda Jackson. Interesting that Bette Davis (who many consider to be a top 3 American actresses ever) has find less awards success for her portrayals of the Queen.
|
|
|
|
Post by PromNightCarrie on Nov 6, 2021 16:18:32 GMT
Yeah it has becomes an impressive awards magnet role. Elizabeth I is also a pretty decent awards winning role, Judi Dench won an oscar (and I argue Blanchett should have won that year too), Mirren won an Emmy, so did (my fav) Glenda Jackson. Interesting that Bette Davis (who many consider to be a top 3 American actresses ever) has find less awards success for her portrayals of the Queen. It's interesting. One would think Elizabeth I would have been the bigger awards magnet. I certainly did. |
|
|
|
Post by fiosnasiob on Nov 6, 2021 19:49:11 GMT
Yeah it has becomes an impressive awards magnet role. Elizabeth I is also a pretty decent awards winning role, Judi Dench won an oscar (and I argue Blanchett should have won that year too), Mirren won an Emmy, so did (my fav) Glenda Jackson. Interesting that Bette Davis (who many consider to be a top 3 American actresses ever) has find less awards success for her portrayals of the Queen. It's interesting. One would think Elizabeth I would have been the bigger awards magnet. I certainly did. Yeah true, one might thinks that just based on the heavy makeup haha. And the fact that she's a great, complex historical figure that was already portrayed on screen by Sarah Bernhardt 100 years ago. I think Queen Elizabeth II was mostly portrayed in UK during the 80's in a more light way (comedies productions) and most of these more serious and effective portrayals are much more recents (which make the numbers of awards in such a short period of time even more impressive). And of course all of this also depends on the quality of the adaptations and the talents of the people behind them. If Mary Queen of Scots (2018) was not directed by first time director Josie Rourke but by a greater, more experienced director (with greater budget, etc...), Margot Robbie would have certainly more chances to shines and get noticed. Now why these talented people aren't making movies around Queen Elizabeth I is another question... |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Nov 6, 2021 19:54:53 GMT
It's interesting. One would think Elizabeth I would have been the bigger awards magnet. I certainly did. Yeah true, one might thinks that just based on the heavy makeup haha. And the fact that she's a great, complex historical figure that was already portrayed on screen by Sarah Bernhardt 100 years ago. I think Queen Elizabeth II was mostly portrayed in UK during the 80's in a more light way (comedies productions) and most of these more serious and effective portrayals are much more recents (which make the numbers of awards in such a short period of time even more impressive). And of course all of this also depends on the quality of the adaptations and the talents of the people behind them. If Mary Queen of Scots (2018) was not directed by first time director Josie Rourke but by a greater, more experienced director (with greater budget, etc...), Margot Robbie would have certainly more chances to shines and get noticed. Now why these talented people aren't making movies around Queen Elizabeth I is another question... I mean, Margot Robbie was extremely close to the nomination as it was. I don't think the choice of director or the budget kept her back from the actual nomination; she just got pipped to the post by Marina de Tavira in the (tied) most loved film of the year. |
|
|
|
Post by fiosnasiob on Nov 6, 2021 20:10:03 GMT
Yeah true, one might thinks that just based on the heavy makeup haha. And the fact that she's a great, complex historical figure that was already portrayed on screen by Sarah Bernhardt 100 years ago. I think Queen Elizabeth II was mostly portrayed in UK during the 80's in a more light way (comedies productions) and most of these more serious and effective portrayals are much more recents (which make the numbers of awards in such a short period of time even more impressive). And of course all of this also depends on the quality of the adaptations and the talents of the people behind them. If Mary Queen of Scots (2018) was not directed by first time director Josie Rourke but by a greater, more experienced director (with greater budget, etc...), Margot Robbie would have certainly more chances to shines and get noticed. Now why these talented people aren't making movies around Queen Elizabeth I is another question... I mean, Margot Robbie was extremely close to the nomination as it was. I don't think the choice of director or the budget kept her back from the actual nomination; she just got pipped to the post by Marina de Tavira in the (tied) most loved film of the year. Was she ? I didn't follow much that year so I will trust you. But apparently she was fighting for the 5th spot, with a better director/film, she could have hoped for more (a winning role, as is the subject of the topic). |
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Nov 6, 2021 22:25:03 GMT
Yeah true, one might thinks that just based on the heavy makeup haha. And the fact that she's a great, complex historical figure that was already portrayed on screen by Sarah Bernhardt 100 years ago. I think Queen Elizabeth II was mostly portrayed in UK during the 80's in a more light way (comedies productions) and most of these more serious and effective portrayals are much more recents (which make the numbers of awards in such a short period of time even more impressive). And of course all of this also depends on the quality of the adaptations and the talents of the people behind them. If Mary Queen of Scots (2018) was not directed by first time director Josie Rourke but by a greater, more experienced director (with greater budget, etc...), Margot Robbie would have certainly more chances to shines and get noticed. Now why these talented people aren't making movies around Queen Elizabeth I is another question... I mean, Margot Robbie was extremely close to the nomination as it was. I don't think the choice of director or the budget kept her back from the actual nomination; she just got pipped to the post by Marina de Tavira in the (tied) most loved film of the year. I always assumed Claire Foy was 6th that year. |
|
