The reviews are in for Hillbilly Elegy and lordy, they are bad. No surprise there – the trailer was distractingly awful and I personally feel so sorry for Amy Adams and Glenn Close for this mess. Perhaps they both thought they could adopt hillbilly accents and play-act poverty-escapism and somehow they would get lots of awards. Speaking of, Glenn and Amy are two actresses who have never won Oscars, even though both have been nominated many times. Glenn has been nominated seven times, Amy nominated six times. Both have been deserving for various performances, mostly Glenn (if we’re being honest). Anyway, Glenn was asked about the Oscar seasons she’s been apart of in the past and how weird it is to campaign for an Oscar and she might have thrown a little shade.
Glenn Close is still a little surprised by Gwyneth Paltrow’s 1999 Oscar win. In an interview with ABC News’ Popcorn with Peter Travers, Close, 73, opened up about her new Netflix movie Hillbilly Elegy, as well as her feelings about industry awards shows. Close said performances can’t be compared to each other, using Paltrow’s Academy Award win for Best Actress for Shakespeare in Love as an example of a choice that didn’t “make sense” to her.
“I honestly feel that to be nominated by your peers is about as good as it gets. And then, I’ve never understood how you could honestly compare performances, you know?” said Close. “I remember the year Gwyneth Paltrow won over that incredible actress who was in Central Station and I thought, ‘What?’ It doesn’t make sense…. So I think who wins has a lot of things to do with how things have been, you know, whether it has traction or whatever. Publicity, how much money did they have to put it out in front of everybody’s sight. I have to be philosophical about it, if I was upset about it….”
In March 1999, Paltrow, 26 years old at the time, won the category, which also included: Cate Blanchett for Elizabeth; Fernanda Montenegro for Central Station; Meryl Streep for One True Thing; and Emily Watson for Hilary and Jackie.
At the time, I was mad about Gwyneth Paltrow winning for Shakespeare in Love as well. I thought, at the time, that Cate Blanchett should have won. Nowadays, I feel like Emily Watson should have won that year – what Watson and Rachel Griffiths did in Hilary and Jackie, my God. I’m a diehard Emily Watson stan though. Anyway, I don’t think Glenn was really trying to be particularly shady about Gwyneth, I think Glenn was mostly being shady about how political the Oscars have been for three decades, and how it’s rarely about the actual best performance. And I mean… she’s not wrong.
Photos courtesy of WENN, Avalon Red.
At the time I thought Gwyneth should have won because I loved Shakespeare in Love (still do.) But looking back – yeesh. Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth was really leaps and bounds ahead of her (I don’t think I’ve seen the other nominated performances.)
I agree this isn’t direct shade at Gwyneth – its not “she was so bad” because she acknowledges being nominated by your peers is a big deal. But the Oscars are super political at this point -maybe they always were?
Cate Blanchett was so good in Elizabeth. Harvey Weinstein was responsible for that Oscar, IIRC. God, Gwyneth’s dress is so awful it hurts my eyes, even after all this time. Glenn Close is a wonderful actress and should have won an Oscar by now. However, singling out Gwyneth’s performance seems petty and beneath her.
You are so right about the dress. Was there no custom tailoring here? And pointy darts with low-hanging non-existent bosom? Bad, just bad.
I loved Shakespeare in Love and was ok with it winning best picture but I had seen Cate Blanchett in Elizabeth prior to the ceremony and she was much much better.
Weinstein is behind that win which further taints it.
For me, it’s about how Cate or Fernanda should have received it. I hate nepotism, I hate overpraised mediocrity and I really hate it when the people who deserve to win, don’t.
Gwyneth is not the worst actress, no. But she was not the best that year. People clearly have not forgotten that.
I was too young to have an opinion at the time, but now – omg Cate Blanchet should have won 1000 times if i compared it woth Shakespeare. The other films I didnt see unfortunately.
I don’t know – I’ve never had the urge to see Cate’s performance again, whereas I’ve seen Shakespeare a couple of times.
This sentiment is partly the internet’s dislike of Gwyneth, and partly the general culture’s undervaluing of comedy or comedy-adjacent stories.
@TBCB yeah but SIL is a movie you can watch over and over because it’s a feel-good movie. Elizabeth is heavy. BUT SIL would have been just as good with, say, Winona Ryder (from whom GP allegedly snaked the part/audition) as Viola. Elizabeth was amazing in large part because of Cate Blanchett specifically.
Meh depends on your taste. I saw SIL and thought it was a waste of time, but I absolutely loved Elizabeth and have seen it at least 15 times – or more – since it came out
@tcbc … Nope, ‘my’ sentiment that Kate Blanchett should have won the 1999 Best Actress Oscar is based upon watching her performance in “Elizabeth” that year. I was absolutely shocked when Gwyneth Paltrow’s name was called instead of Cate’s. Her performance in “Elizabeth” was stellar. I had no idea who Cate was before “Elizabeth.”
Cate gave a performance. Gwyneth had a featured role in “Shakespeare in Love,” but it felt to me that the film was successful based more on the incredible ensemble cast rather than her performance alone. But that’s just my opinion.
I thought Elizabeth was good but I actually preferred Cate in the sequel. I had a completely different perception of the “ensemble” in SiL. I don’t really remember any of the singular performances BESIDES Gwyneth’s (and maybe Dame Judi’s despite the brevity of her role). Gwyneth’s role was the quintessential ingenue role and I felt like she imbued it with a lot of earnestness and nuance. Her chemistry with Joseph Fiennes and Imelda Staunton as her nurse were two of the highlights for me.
Yep Cate Blanchett was robbed for sure. She was sublime in Elizabeth.
Glenn Close is right that was Cate Blanchett’’s Oscar for Elizabeth. Weinstein purchased that Oscar for Paltrow. She wasn’t convincing as a woman let alone a boy. The movie is good because of the supporting cast. Much of which was in Elizabeth as well.
Her dress was also ill fitting. I just can’t with her. I did like Sliding doors but I don’t watch it anymore because, well, of her
Hillbilly Elegy is so problematic. Netflix shouldn’t have bothered with an adaptation, but I’m not gonna begrudge Glenn Close work. I do think it’s fun to point out that time Amy Adams played a Hillbilly on an episode of Buffy.
omg I totally forgot! Tara’s hillbilly cousin! wow, does that bring me back. Great episode too!
yes! Amy also dated Jim on The Office for a few episodes!
Gwyneth Paltrow has an Oscar and Glenn Close hasn’t, that’s all you need to know to understand The Academy is a joke.
And let’s not forget Dame Judi Dench (whom I ADORE!!!) but she won a supporting Oscar for LESS THAN 10 MIN. OF SCREEN TIME!!!!
“During the 71st Academy Awards, Dame Judi Dench won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actress for playing Queen Elizabeth I in Shakespeare in Love. Dench acknowledged the brevity of her role while accepting the statuette, joking that, “I feel for eight minutes on the screen, I should only get a little bit of him.”Jan 16, 2016”
Judi’s AND Goop’s were bought and paid for by Weinstein. End of.
I think the Oscar winner with the least screen time goes to Beatrice Straight, who won supporting actress in 1977 for Network. She played William Holden’s jilted wife; she was on screen for a total of five-plus minutes. Straight was quite powerful in the role, but, come on.
You’re right, it was Straight. Here’s the list of shortest performances: https://gulfnews.com/lifestyle/community/these-actors-won-oscars-with-less-than-16-minutes-of-screen-time-1.2092282
You would think there would be some time criteria involved there, but I suppose they’re worried that would create issues in limiting knock out performances like Anythony Hopkins in “Silence of the Lambs” from being up for consideration.
Hardly anybody would argue he wasn’t iconic in that movie, but he’s really only in it for sixteen minutes total.
Yes, there have been many travesties especially when it comes to actresses, because Hollywood likes to reward the latest “ingenue” or “flavor of the month.” I think even Paltrow herself must know she didn’t deserve to win.
The other big travesty was Jennifer Connelly winning over Helen Mirren and Maggie Smith — if you saw Gosford Park, ANY of the women in that movie (including those not even nominated like Kristen Scott-Thomas, Emily Watson, Eileen Atkins, Claudie Blakley, Kelly MacDonald) were leaps and bounds ahead of Connelly’s performance in A Beautiful Mind. But, . . . that’s Hollywood for you.
That was a TRAVESTY! The women of Gosford Park were MARVELOUS! I adore that movie and have watched it time and time again.
I also thought Cate Blanchett should have won. But I didn’t see the other nominees besides Paltrow and Blanchett.
Blanchett definitely should have won IMO. I think that’s where my dislike for Goopy started because she did not deserve that Oscar.
It’s where my dislike of Goop began also and she has not done nor said anything since that would change my mind.
Remember her “I’m not longer a 26-year-old with an Oscar so not such a big threat and so I feel a sisterhood emerging around me” comments? She also said she couldn’t pretend to be someone who earns 20,000 a year. Probably a secret Ayn Rand fan.
She can say whatever she wants as far as I’m concerned.
She is an actor to her core and she has been baited by awards enough times only to be slighted
At the end of the day
Glenn will get an honorary one if nothing else
Amy will get her due
And Gwyneth got hers bc of…many factors but what’s done is done. Gs destiny was always predetermined. And at that point, with Harvey being a literal monster behind her who wanted to put up a fight. Give it to her for her pedigree, her potential, her magic it factor- the doe a deer like performance that has star power- justify it that way anyway you want to…
TL DR: Glenn is not wrong but hindsight is 2020
Gwyneth really was the it girl of that period, although I didn’t see why because I always thought she was kind of odd-looking. I think part of the reason she got the Oscar was that she did a great job playing the lead role in Emma a year or two earlier, which people thought she’d get a nomination for but she was passed over. She then followed up Emma with another British accent role in SIL, and I think the Oscar was probably cumulative for both of those performances. Because SIL, to me, was not all that, while in Emma she really carried the whole movie with a lot of charm.
But, I still cannot believe how horrible her whole look was that night. The drooped dress made her look eleven years old, and that stark, pulled back hair looked like she jumped out of the shower and didn’t have time to do anything to it. Gywneth must be so pissed off that her look was generally panned. I wonder if her Oscar experience is tainted because she seems self-obsessed enough to have wanted the Oscar AND everyone saying she looked gorgeous.
It was definitely a tainted night for her; she was embarrassed at her gushing speech and said she stayed in bed for a fortnight afterwards.
A lot of actors shouldn’t have won an Oscar for their performances. Paltrow is definitely one of them.
She’s never been nominated or won another one since and we all know now the one she has was paid for
Ugh I think Blanchett is so overrated. I don’t remember the movies that year, and I never even saw Shakespeare in Love, so I can’t comment on Paltrow. But it rarely goes to the best actual performance, let’s be real.
Agreed about Blanchett, I really don’t get it.
The thing with Paltrow is that she’s never given a performance of the same caliber as the other women nominated. Whereas sometimes actors get a make up Oscar for a lesser role, like what happened to Pacino, Paltrow has been aggressively mediocre throughout the years.
Blanchette and her whole I named my son after Roman Polanski, I didn’t know Harvey or Woody were creeps until everyone complained about me working with them… She needs to go away.
I like her a lot as an actress, but in recent years have come to agree that as a person, she is problematic.
Absolutely. I find Cate Blanchett sickening. I am so glad others are seeing it too. I thought she did well in Elizabeth, but that was the first thing I’d ever seen her in. Having seen her in other things since, my opinion has fallen of her as an actress as well as a person. Gwyneth was a frothy bit of nothing in SIL and followed it up with a shocker of a dress at the Oscars. Loved Glenn Close in Dangerous Liaisons- that final scene at the theatre when she is discovered, and goes home alone- gives me shivers- in a good way.
I found her a bit pretentious and insubstantial in interviews even before the Allen and Polanski thing. However, although I agree with other posters she often overacts, you have to admit she’s got some acting talent compared with someone like Goop.
Meryl Streep also said she’d never heard anything about Harvey Weinstein. Sure, sure, sure.
I agree with you about Blanchett. I’ve always felt she overacts in every role and she is lauded because a) the roles she chooses are usually award ready and b) because of her accent. I believe accent helps a lot of actors from the UK and Australia succeed over counterparts from other parts of the world.
I think Cate is absolutely spot on in some films (Hanna, An Ideal Husband, Elizabeth, Babel, Carol) but a horrible overactor in others. Theater actors can overdo it sometimes maybe.
She is right but Gwyneth is so well connected and this could piss off many people in the Academy. This is a mistake and Glenn will never win one because of this.
I think Glenn may feel like she isn’t going to win one anyway and so speaks freely. You’re right and the Academy may have a tantrum over this but Glenn is not wrong. They have nominated her seven times for performances that deserved a win but never gave her the award whilst giving the award to many who did not give a deserving performance. It’s all bought and paid for, Glenn knows this. It’s really disappointing that things are the way they are now.
I don’t feel like Gwyneth is that well-connected. She’s never been nominated for another Oscar after her win for SiL.
Agree 100% Glenn!!! Should have been Cate Blanchett! Goop is not all that as an actress and Shakespeare in Live was fluff.
I don’t know who it should have been as I haven’t seen other movies, but an Oscar for Shakespeare in love, which is just essentially a period romantic comedy, is a joke. I thought she wasn’t even particularly good in it.
It beat Saving private Ryan which is bananas to me. I’m not even a war movie person and that movie is outstanding.
It also beat Elizabeth, Life is Beautiful (which I’m not a fan of, but it was the it thing that year) and the Thin Red Line.
I enjoyed SiL, but as an ensemble cast. Gwyneth didn’t stand out to me as a great actress in the film.
When I think about someone worthy of winning an Oscar for their performance, I ask myself: Can I imagine anyone else playing that role, and doing as good a job?
Cate Blanchett WAS Elizabeth. No one could have done a better job.
That was the year I finally gave up caring about the Oscars. There was nothing exceptional about GP’s performance, at all. The movie was an average rom com with good costumes.
I hear that. The year I gave up on the Oscars was when John Travolta got nominated for Pulp Fiction, but NOT Samuel L. Jackson! In what bizarro alternate universe is that fair? And then Robert Forster got nominated for Jackie Brown but NOT Sam Jackson. Such blatantly racist disgusting corruption at the Academy. I don’t even watch them anymore, I just look at the photos of the gown next day.
Agree Shakespeare in Love was nothing exceptional. GP’s role was nothing exceptional – hardly required any real depth as an actor anyway.
I gave up on the Oscars when John Wayne won for True Grit and he was up against Dustin Hoffman in Midnight Cowboy. Considering John Wayne played the same character in all of his movies, which happened to be how he was in real life, giving him an Oscar was a joke.
Emily Watson’s performance was outstanding in Hillary and Jackie. And now, I must check out Central Station.
Harvey Weinstein got her that Oscar by doing shady campaign shit. I don’t want to be insensitive about her history with Harvey, especially the parts which were absolutely not her fault, but that’s why she has an Oscar. Not because she was good.
I always feel like Harvey Weinstein bought a lot of oscars.
Of course its fun to say that about paltrow, but then i have to realize that he bought Denzel’s oscar in Glory too. But that performance was amazing. Not a movie i would watch again- war and slavery- but it was a great performance.
popular opinion: Paltrow was not the best actress in the 1999 awards season….
She’s not wrong. But the Oscars are rarely if ever about the truly “Best” anything. This was just a particularly obvious example…especially if you have seen Central Station. (Wow)
This was the height of Weinstein playing his game and so those Oscars are going to feel pretty poison for other reasons. It’s a good movie and now everything surrounding it is stomach-churning.
I saw Central Station and agree the lead actress was fabulous. Her name is on the tip of my tongue and that’s why she did not have a chance. The other actresses on the list for that year were well-known and wonderful, so yeah, I agree Harvey Weinstein got Paltrow that Oscar. George Clooney said Paltrow played things very well, but I know it’s not politically correct to say that now.
I still think she should have won for Dangerous Liaisons. She was iconic in that. And I had to go back and see who won and it was Jodie Foster in the accused.
Also I never realized that John Malkovich was never even nominated for Valmont… what is that?
Great minds, NIC919. I came here to say how magnificent in every way there is to be magnificent GC was in “ Dangerous Liaisons”. And John Malkovitch – what a powerhouse duo.
Jodie Foster was amazing in The Accused. What a hard film to watch.
Keanu and Uma were so young and fresh faced in DL.
Dangerous Liaisons is in my queue. I grew up at the turn of the millennium so Cruel Intentions is one of my all-times so I’m very excited to check out the source material!
What I remember most about Gwyneth Paltrow winning that year was her sitting in that seat after she was announced as the winner and it looked like she was constipated and straining. Then that dress and the ill fit! 🤨 Don’t even get me started. Didn’t deserve the win. All of it cringeworthy.
I don’t watch the Oscars anymore. Just the red carpet. I might watch the whole show with the sound turned off just so I can see the fashion and the styling.
Harvey Weinstein and her Father bought the Oscar. I am glad I am not the only one to think her dress looked like hell too. I always read “her iconic Oscar dress”, and it was so poorly fitted I’ve always thought they were mad at her!
Her grandfather was dying of cancer and her father was really sick with throat cancer. She was only 26. That’s a lot to be going through for a young woman, while trying to look happy at the Oscars.
I love Glenn but I disagree about Gwyneth. I know this may not be a popular opinion here but I love Shakespeare in Love and I think Gwyneth really gave a memorable, heartfelt performance. If she didn’t deserve the win, I think she definitely deserved to be nominated.
I agree. The movie was clever and witty, every part of it was very well done. A movie shouldn’t have to be emotionally exhausting to be considered “Oscar worthy”.
Also, as annoying as Paltrow is in real life, she’s a good enough actor that when I see her in things I forget how awful she is. That’s not something I can say about all Oscar winners.
She was good in Sliding Doors, better than on SIL IMO.
I liked Gwyneth in Sliding Doors and Emma, and the one where she is a air steward who becomes a pilot in the end. But I like those light, cheerful sort of movies. Especially if there’s a good wardrobe or interior design to go with it. Actually, I think that’s probably Gwyneth’s specialty really- light and cheerful, with a good wardrobe.
View from the Top with Christina Applegate! Oh my goodness, I love that movie! I completely forgot about it. “You put the wrong emphASis on the incorrect syLAble…”
I vividly remember Goop skipping like a toddler with her Oscar down the press line after winning in that ill-fitting pink dress. VOMIT.
I remember she said she was so embarrassed by her gushing speech afterwards that she stayed in bed for two weeks.
I actually don’t mind Paltrow as an actress and have mostly liked her performances, but I think pretty much everyone was surprised by that win considering who she was up against. In another year, I could see her winning, but there were some titans she took down there.
Glen Close and Amy Adams are definitely underrated, though. I still think Adams was the standout alongside Bale for “American Hustle,” and I say that as somebody who finds J. Law generally likeable…and I find it very interesting that people don’t scream about Close being robbed when she’s been nominated the same number of times as Leonardo DiCaprio without winning.
Amy was AMAZING in American Hustle.
She’s actually the one I usually bring up when people said Leo was “due”, as they’re the same age and had similar numbers of nominations, but Glenn for sure is due as well.
I remember that year’s oscars so well – I was gutted for Cate Blanchett. I loved both films but Blanchett’s performance was so memorably fantastic.
I was screaming this the night it happened. Paltrow’s win was a Weinstein-manufactured PR campaign…
Give Close an award for telling the darn TRUTH. The whole HW awards process is pure trash and garbage. It’s tainted as well as politics.
So many people have been overlooked because of who has campaigned and bought it. The worse travesty was Morgan Freeman in his Driving Ms Daisy performance losing.
To me it’s not special anymore so there it is!
Old white people making insane decisions.
This past year was a boring hot mess. Pitt winning was hilarious!
Rotten Tomatoes are in the same boat
of paid morons who think they are more powerful than they are. I saw this movie and it wasn’t that terrible. People sadly are afraid to think for themselves.
She’s not wrong.
Even though I love Sandra Bullock, she would be my choice as someone who wasn’t very deserving. Any actress could have pulled off that role just as good – if not better – than her. It was a generic role/film.
Yes, I love Sandra too but she’s always the same in every film. She did say she felt like she didn’t deserve it though. Plus The Blind Side was celebrating a horribly paternalistic approach to racial and class issues. It’s sort of like The Help.
The gold dress in the top picture is perfection. Beautifully fitted and age appropriate and glamorous. Was not a fan until the boil the bunny film.
I am former actor and theatre teacher who taught Romeo and Juliet for years. I thought her performance was wonderful and I adored that movie. They also made a special educational video about Shakespeare and Romeo and Juliet that I used for years. I have no problem with her winning.
The Oscars are just like a sporting event; it’s 10% about the merit and 90% about the spectacle and the advertising for and generation of interest in the (film and not awards) industry. Any debates about the merit just gives the Oscars more coverage and conversation. They just have to be careful enough to make sure they set the voting rules just so they don’t lose all credibility as an awards show. Otherwise all the disagreement about who deserves / does not deserve just helps the Oscar’s raison d’etre: remain the premier film award in HW and generate massive coverage for their “mother” industry, the film industry and the actors and crew.
Cate’s a bit of an over-actor. I prefer Emily Blunt and Marion Cotillard. Gwyneth is a reliable actress but think it was about the moment: people went crazy for a period romance (I thought the film was really boring). Also they seem to always love a tall, statuesque, blonde up-and-coming actress. Judy Dench has been plugging away at it for decades and is a good actress so don’t mind her getting it for 10 minutes on screen. Oscars are seen as the pinnacle of your career as a serious actor but what happened to Hilary Swank, Brie Larson, and a bunch of others?
Can’t watch any film with Geoffrey Rush in it any more. Australia’s defamation and libel laws are very strict and I disagreed with the outcome of his trial, which seemed to have completely ignored Erin Norvill’s testimony. I read Yael Stone only dared to speak to the NY Times after a top firm in Australia agreed to rep her pro bono if her article attracted similar legal action.
Some channel on YouTube did a whole video about this. They pointed out that this was the year that Harvey Winestein changed how actors campaign for their Oscar.
BeKindRewind! It is such a great YouTube channel and I highly recommend it to anyone interested in learning more about the history of women in Hollywood!
I like Emma Stone but how about her Oscar win?
Now THAT was a face-crack for me. That whole moving was a big, giant nothing!burger and I can’t believe ES won. I quite enjoy her usually (she was the best part of the Andrew Garfield Spiderman movies, IMO) but any actress with marginal vocal/dance skills could have played that role.
Meh who cares.
Load of pretentious twaddle.
Luvvies and egomaniacs waffling on about other luvvies and meaningless awards for their luvvieness.