Did Katharine Hepburn deserve four Oscars?
Monday, May 11, 2020 at 9:21AM By Cláudio Alves...
Before we wrap up our coverage of 1981, we must talk about the Oscar record that was established that season and has never been broken since.
By winning the Best Actress trophy for On Golden Pond, Katharine Hepburn became the most awarded actor in Academy Awards history, with four victories. That's not the only factor that makes her awards run so interesting. Famously, she was part of the only Best Actress tie when she and Barbra Streisand both won in 1968. Then, there's the fact that her first win came from the biggest Oscar eligibility period ever (17 months, 1932-33) and that the gap between her first win and her last is the longest for any actor (48 years). All this and she was never present to accept her little golden men. Whether you love her or not, this Old Hollywood star was truly one of a kind...
After a mildly inconsistent career onstage, Katharine Hepburn made her first movie in 1932 for RKO. The picture was a drama called A Bill of Divorcement in which she shone, something that didn't go unnoticed by the studio that henceforth put all its efforts into making the ingenue into the next big star. Her three following movie roles saw her dress up like a silver moth, bring to life one of American literature's most beloved heroines, and offer 1930s audiences their version of Rachel Berry. It was for that last effort, Morning Glory, that Hepburn would be Oscar-nominated and eventually win, sealing the deal on her stardom.
For the past 87 years, many have wondered why the actress was nominated for that instead of George Cukor's Little Women. It certainly feels strange, considering that the Louisa May Alcott adaptation scored a Best Picture nod while Morning Glory wasn't recognized in any category beyond Best Actress. The nature of her role in Morning Glory was probably what pushed that film to Oscar glory. After all, the Academy has a well-known affection for actors playing actors, and the character of Eva Lovelace is defined by her ambitions as a performer. She's a young actress, eager to succeed in show business and Hepburn plays her with single-minded intensity from minute one.
It's a tiresomely consistent performance and only a drunken interlude offers the actress any opportunity to add variation to this obnoxious character. She's best when trying to be funny and worst when attempting to make sense of the movie's romantic conclusion. The problems of the script ultimately defeat Hepburn, but that didn't stop the Academy from handling her the Oscar. After that, it would take many decades before she would win again, though nominations continued to come her way. From 1933 to 1967, Hepburn's career took many sharp turns, from box-office poison to legend-status, through political controversy, a much-publicized romance with Spencer Tracy, and eight additional Oscar nominations.
That very same romance would be at the center of her second Best Actress win, which came in 1967 for the last film the lovebirds ever did together, Guess Who's Coming to Dinner. Stodgy, stale, and retrograde, this Stanley Kramer lecture on racial equality as seen through the eyes of white liberals is a dreadful thing. Still, the sentimental appeal the movie acquires thanks to the histories of Hepburn and Tracy adds some value to the enterprise. This was the actor's last movie, as he died not long after shooting wrapped. That real-life tragedy, as well as the movie's popularity with a certain crowd (it was a box office hit and Best Picture nominee), convinced the Academy to give Hepburn a second Oscar.
Honestly, I wish I could love this performance as some do, but it's a repetitive work with little to no depth. Hepburn seems to be always on the verge of tears, oscillating between beatific admiration for Tracy's patriarch and bland motherly devotion. Her initial reaction to Sidney Poitier as her daughter's black fiancée is so overdone that it's comical and only an acidic scene with a prejudiced employee sees the actress wake up from her sentimental stupor. Reading up on the behind the scenes details of the movie offers some explanation to Hepburn's lackluster work, but that doesn't make her victory any less undeserving.
The following year, Hepburn won again, becoming the second woman to win back-to-back Best Actress trophies after Luise Rainer in the 30s. In The Lion in Winter, Katharine Hepburn is Eleanor of Aquitaine, the imprisoned wife of Henry II, King of England in the 12th century. Not that the production makes any pretension of being remotely bound to the realities of history. This is a sordid melodrama first and foremost, a soap opera set in Medieval times whose narrative serves as a pretext to gather a bunch of illustrious actors and have them throw shade at each other in increasingly hyper-literate ways. It's glorious, that's what it is.
A lot of that is due to its perfect cast lead by Peter O'Toole and Hepburn, who sinking their teeth into the most succulent of roles and clash their contrasting acting styles with such force the screen seems to vibrate. As Elanor, Hepburn is a force of nature, elevating the Shakespeare-lite witticisms into blunt instruments of verbal warfare. Her insults are no vacuous wordplay, they are the overflow of poison that comes from a maltreated soul, one so consumed by cruelty that the barrier between love and hatred is nonexistent. It's a riveting spectacle, but also frightening, her wrath pulsing with genuine pain. To see her and O'Toole play against each other is to see the most toxic sort of foreplay, erotically charged and drowning in viperous abandon.
A marvelous performance indeed and undoubtedly Oscar-worthy too. The same, unfortunately, can't be said about her fourth win, for 1981's On Golden Pond. I confess I have little affection for this syrupy swan song to Henry Fonda, although there are some metatextual elements to do with its actors that make it mildly captivating. As for Katharine Hepburn's performance as the wife of Fonda's curmudgeon, it's a nice effort with little challenges but a couple of nice moments. At the very least, her chemistry with the coprotagonist is believable and the panic she projects during some dramatic scenes is admittedly moving.
It's still not even close to Oscar-worthy in my book. That's the sad thing about Hepburn's historic record. For one of the best actresses to have ever stepped in front of a camera, the most awarded performer in Oscar history, Katharine Hepburn's wins offer a rather lousy representation of her talents. Apart from The Lion in Winter, they are mediocre works that ask little of the actress and there's not even the excuse of her being such an overwhelming lock that another winner was impossible. Hell, in 1968 the results were so close they produced a tie.
All that complaining aside, I do love Katharine Hepburn and wouldn't want to finish a piece about her in such a sour note. Thinking of that and what was previously done for Meryl Streep and Paul Newman, here go some choices that might've made for more justifiable Oscar victories:
ALICE ADAMS (1935)
George Stevens was one of Hepburn's best directors and, in this 1935 melodrama cum comedy, he got her to give one of her most relaxed performances. She's hardly ever been funnier than here, but some of the most serious scenes are of equal mastery, showing realistic sorrow and desperation amid the laughs.
THE PHILADELPHIA STORY (1940)
After a string of flops in the late 30s, Hepburn's movie career was at risk, but she was quick to buck the trend with a role made for her. The Philadelphia Story is a pivot point of great importance in the actress's illustrious career as well as her best movie star performance. It allows Hepburn to use her screen persona as a starting point for a razor-sharp characterization. There's also great romantic chemistry and hilarious drunken shenanigans for those interested.
;)
SUDDENLY, LAST SUMMER (1959)
In this Tennessee Williams adaptation, Hepburn turns motherhood into a perversion viler and more disgusting than even the act of eating human flesh. This is a poisonous wonder, an actress relishing in her character's malevolence in such a way that it's impossible to take our eyes off of her.
LONG DAY'S JOURNEY INTO NIGHT (1962)
Speaking of grand plays adapted to the screen and the brilliance of Hepburn, there's nothing else in her career that comes even close to her Mary Tyrone in Long Day's Journey Into Night. Wrecked and broken, this performance is more akin to a demonic possession than a star turn, a public self-evisceration of a damaged soul that's upsetting in its grotesque excess and heartbreaking in its emotional honesty.
Those four highlighted performances are sterling achievements but, in truth, we could list half a dozen more and still have enough for another piece. Of her nominated works, David Lean's Summertime deserves an honorable mention for its lovelorn melancholy. Not that she could ever hope to win against Anna Magnani's titanic performance in The Rose Tattoo, but it's still one of her best. As for the non-nominated works, I'd like to mention her 1937 self-parody in Stage Door, the 1938 comedy double-whammy of Bringing Up Baby and Holiday as well as her work in 1949's Adam's Rib, her best movie with Tracy as far as I'm concerned.
So, in conclusion, the answer to the question of "did Katharine Hepburn deserve four Oscars?" is yes. Though, not for, at least, three of those performances.
More from our 1981 retrospective
- The 1981 Supporting Actress Smackdown
- Kathleen Turner's sizzling debut in Body Heat
- Meryl's first Best Actress nomination
- Harrison Ford in Raiders of the Lost Ark
- Jessica Harper in Pennies From Heaven
- Marilia Pera in Pixote
- Only When I Laugh and the Razzies
- Kathryn Harrold in Modern Romance
- Vintage: Pop Culture in 1981
- Vintage: Sexiest People Born in 1981
Reader Comments (64)
Katharine Hepburn deserved 4 Oscars: for Alice Adams (1935), Woman of the Year (1942), Summertime (1955) and Long Day's Journey into Night (1962). Needless to say, those aren't the 4 she won for. Her Oscars for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and On Golden Pond are especially undeserved.
I love Katharine Hepburn and believe she deserves four Oscars, just not for the movies she won for except The Lion in Winter, in which she more than holds her own opposite Peter O'Toole. In my opinion, she should have won for The Philadelphia Story and at least been nominated for Adam's Rib. Don't be too hard on Morning Glory. It may not be a great film but she was wonderful in it.
Hepburn was deserving of four academy awards. Of her nominated performances I would've awarded her for Mourning Glory (1932/33), Alice Adams (1935), The Philadelphia Story (1940) & Long Day's Journey Into Night (1962). She and Streisand are so close to my choice but i had to give it to the former.
Her win in 67 and 81 are undeserved i agree on. Other films I'd wish she'd been noticed for were Little Women (1932/33), Sylvia Scarlett (1935), Bringing Up Baby (1938) & Adam;s Rib (1949). I'm happy she holds the record still because she is one of the greatest stars to grace the big screen. How she managed to survive from the 30's till the early 90's when many other contemporaries didn't shows her great skill.
I love Katharine in On Golden Pond, where I completely buy the character and love everything she brings to the screen. With that said, I don't disagree with you on Guess Who's Coming to Dinner and Morning Glory, and that's a fine list of alternative Oscar wins for her. Count me among those who wanted her to win for Little Women over Morning Glory.
First though just by reading the article's title: 'How dare you...?'
Hepburn's drunk Shakespeare won her the Oscar for Morning Glory, I guarantee it.
She certainly did! And she might've very well been the only person to ever have deserved four wins, she just didn't win for those. I'm glad you point out titles that she should've won for but the fact is that what makes those 3 wins so underwhelming is that the list is quite extensive.
I would only throw Woman of the Year as yet another sterling example of her many talents. Even if she wasn't the absolute best of the nominees or of the year, that's already 9 films for which she would've made a great winner!
I love Katharine Hepburn and On Golden Pond. I think you undervalue her performance. She has chemistry with everyone in the movie: Henry Fonda, Jane Fonda, Dabney Coleman, the kid, even the mailman. She’s what makes the movie work. She likely won for one particular scene (her Oscar clip of course, “You’re my knight in shining armor...”). The way she gazes at her husband as he wanders off into the woods gets me every time.
She may not have deserved the win in 1981. But you’re right that she missed at least two other deserved Oscars. The Philadelphia Story and Adam’s Rib are my two favorite Hepburn performances. Generally speaking, the Academy ignores comedic performances.
It’s a shame she won for Guess Who’s Coming... when she was easily the worst of the 5 nominated actresses and the remaining four were all iconic.
She deserved 6 Oscars
And also, after reading the title... HOW DARE YOU!
The actual question is "Did Meryl Streep deserved her 3rd oscar for what should not even land her a nomination in the emmy actress in a tv movie?"" or "Did Meryl Streep deserved 21 nominations"
sorry for coming for Meryl but in the words of Bob the Drag Queen "If you stay petty, you ain't gotta get petty"
@Ani di: You & Kate Hepburn both came for Meryl. That's one of the reasons why I think Kate did not deserve 4 Oscars. She was a bit of a snob.
No.
Nooooooo!!!# not for the movies she got them for.
Of those 4 only The Lion in Winter qualifies
She should have won for LDJIN and Philadelphia Story
All she did in GWCTD and On Golden Pond was well up with tears.
Should Streep have won for Iron Lady ? No. But there are at least 5 of her other movies she should have won for. 8
I'm totally fine with her 4 Oscars.
I only like 1 of the wins the one in 68,she's ok in the other roles that won just not statue worthy,personally I think she should have won in 59 cos that's my favourite of hers.
No.
I find her incredibly dull and her acting over calculated.
The short answer: "no." Her win for The Lion in Winter, which thinks garrulousness is synonymous with smarts, is by far her best.
Did she deserve many of her nominations? Yes. Some of them are for crap performances in good movies and crap performances in crap movies.
She deserved to win for Alice Adams, The Philadelphia Story, or Long Day's Journey into Night.
She should've been nominated for Little Women, Stage Door, Holiday (a beautiful, subtle, queer film), and The Trojan Women.
@Cláudio Alves now don't be so harsh on her performance in Guess Who's Coming To Dinner. She gave a halfway-empathetic, elegantly confident and wryly observant performance though the execution of the thematic values and "social issues" in this film have not aged well and as Katharine Houghton said once in an interview with Larry King, "“I don’t think it did a thing for civil rights. ... It was a movie for white people.”
Let's examine why Hepburn did not win the Oscars for roles that were much more deserving:
Alice Adams (1935): She lost to Bette Davis for Dangerous, not because she was the best but because of the overall goodwill and sympathy she garnered from the previous year's Of Human Bondage's write-in nomination. Bette Davis should have won for All About Eve, period.
The Philadelphia Story (1940): Does anybody really remember Kitty Foyle as compared to the iconic TPS? But I think Hepburn lost because Ginger Rogers' role had more "ups and downs" plus the former had only barely managed to make a comeback from her Hollywood Poison status, while Rogers was still immensely well-liked in the industry at that time.
Suddenly, Last Summer (1959): Taylor split the votes from her, though Hepburn gave the more inventive performance. Signoret's role already generated heat and critical acclaim from Cannes, plus the film's exploration of the sexual mores was a sign of the impending arrival 1960s sexual revolution. Plus I suspect the academy wanted to use this as a welcoming party for their latest French export. Although I do think either Hepburn should have won.
Long Day's Journey Into Night (1962): A very competitive year, with five performances that ranged from very good to iconic. Anne Bancroft's role and film was probably much more sympathetic and beloved, despite the enormous complexity of Hepburn's Mary Tyrone. There should be an essay examining the Best Actress nominees of 1962.
My personal favourite will always be Summertime though.
Nice article!
She didn't deserve them for the performances she received them for no, except Lion in Winter. But she did give at least four worthy performances throughout her career so I suppose in the general sense the answer is yes.
I'd have much rather seen her win for Holiday, Suddenly, Last Summer, Long Day's Journey Into Night (perhaps her best performance) and Lion in Winter.
I'm genuinely surprised people like her performance in Summertime so much. She seems so miscast. I never believe her loneliness for one moment. Plus she has ZERO chemistry with Rossano Brazzi.
Hepburn is one of the best.
I love the mention of Summertime. I think it's one of Hepburn's great performances and she really sinks herself into the role - at times challenging her screen persona. I also think it's one of Lean's stronger efforts, and shows what a skilled filmmaker he is.
The "Morning Glory" win isn't the strongest, but it seems to be the type of win the Academy is known for. Cementing a star (e.g., Jennifer Lawrence, Paltrow) and honoring someone who had two great achievements in one year (e.g., Alicia Vikander, Winslet).
I’d give her four Oscars for sure, just not the ones she won for.
Alice Adams and Long Days Journey and Holiday. And I think several other performance are jockeying for a fourth.
I’m biased I love her.
I love Hepburn even if I'm not a fan of her Oscar victories, except the one for LION. Of course if the first Oscar was for LITTLE WOMEN my idea would be different now. In 1967 I would have choose Dunaway of Bancroft, in 1981 Sarandon or Streep (ok, that would have been the last Oscar glory chance for Marsha Mason, but I'm not sure it would have been the right occasion)...Anyway (except Mason) they are Oscar queens, so at last it's ok
Nuts as it sounds, her competition considered, I think Hepburn only deserved to triumph on one occasion - for SUMMERTIME.
Katharine Hepburn was a great actress and was a huge icon for women. Strong, independant, intelligent and beautiful, she cut a swath through Hollywood and was a cultural icon for decades.
I don't begrudge her 4 Oscars, but it's a shame she got a last one for "On Golden Pond".
I honour those much greater performances such as "Summertime", "Philadelphia Story", and "Adams Rib".
(Oscar is rarely fair or good at rewarding people for the right work,, something we all know- which is the fun of articles like this one)
I don't think ANYONE deserves four Oscars. Every time somebody wins a second, third or fourth Oscar, I think that someone else who might be overdue pr incredibly deserving did not win their first. Sometimes it can't be helped, because the work is just THAT undeeniably deserving (Cate Blanchett for Blue Jasmine, all three times Daniel Day-Lewis won) but as a general rule, the only way I can accept someone winning another Oscar is if the work was on par with or better than their previous win (or if the competition was weak enough that it makes sense). I don't sense that with Katharine Hepburn. She's a terrific screeen presence, but I've never found her versatile enough to win these many trophies (I'm often annoyed at how many times Meeryl Streep has been nominated, but at least I never feel she's doing the same work over and over, which I often feel about Katee Hepburn). Though I do agree she should have won for The Philadelphia Story and thought she was amazing in The Lion in Winter.
Great article and I'm in total agreement. But I'd add "The African Queen" to her list of stellar onscreen work.
Well she deserved the one for Lion in Winter. She has Edith Evan's Oscar the previous year.
I guess you could give her one for the Philadephia Story instead of Ginger Rogers (although Bette Davis in the Letter is there). 1962 is an all timer so don't know how I would honestly choose.
No.
She should have won three Oscars:
The Philadelphia Story
Long Day’ s Journey...
The Lion in Winter
Only Gena Rowlands deserved four Oscars. Five, to be exact.
In my opinion, she did not. She has never been a versatile actor. She was probably a huge star. Her charisma is visible but her acting is alright but unremarkable.
Serious question: is versatility a virtue? Hepburn's purported lack of versatility versus Meryl Streep's hysteria for versatility? Bogart and John Wayne were stars and actors who on occasion gave good to great performances as actors. I'd say Hepburn was a star, but a in a peculiar place. She had periods of profound alienation from American audiences (the mid to late thirties, the early sixties).
Nat, what are your 5 favourite Hepburn performances?
Does anyone deserve four Oscars? Probably not when you consider how many people get nominated more than once and then never win. Technically, Hepburn won 5 if you count the Oscar to Cate Blanchett for playing Hepburn in "The Aviator." I personally never liked her. The Yankee accent, the stiff acting, the bullying, being closeted, etc. When she authorized that bitchy book from her maid upon her death, I just thought, what a horrible woman.
I’m glad that K. Hepburn holds the record. She certainly deserves four - but I’d award them for Alice Adams/even winner Bette Davis agreed, LDJINight, Lion in Winter (still a tie) and maybe a Supporting for On Golden Pond, just for a complete career thank-you.
The Academy does award for the wrong role and when the role is completely deserved, there’s always a reason to vote for someone else (she just received one, there’s someone new to spotlight, etc). If you’re great, give them the gold.
re: Owen
As a Hepburn fan you come to the realization that Hepburn's main concern is herself. She doesn't care about her movies. She doesn't care about her costars. In fact she has no chemistry with any of her costars. Maybe Cary Grant. They were great together and she genuinely seems to be interacting with him instead of just acting at him or beside him. They try to sell Hepburn and Tracy as some magical on screen pairing but to me they lack any real spark. They don't sizzle the way the publicity departments try to depict. William Powell and Myrna Loy. That was an onscreen couple for the ages.
Yeah-your title is irritating-I retrospective, Katherine Hepburn deserves 5 or 6 Awards.
Regarding Morning Glory - at year only had 3 Best Actress nominees. Her performance certainly outshines the other two. And since Little Women hovered in the background, it was like voters were rewarding both performances. (Like rewarded Winslet for the dreadful Reader when Revolutionary Road hovered nearby).
*Ive never seen it, but was as outstanding in The Rainmaker?
In 1968, Katharine Hepburn received her tenth Oscar nomination. She had won her first Best Actress prize as an ingenue 35 years earlier and been denied repeatedly for doing for extraordinary work since.
In 1968 her life long screen partner Spencer Tracy
had died a few days after finishing their final film. Hepburn had done minimal work for the past decade to nurse Tracy as his health declined. Further, she had put up her entire salary for Guess Who's Coming to Dinner asca bond when the insurance company would not issue the production company a policy for Tracy's casting due to tenuous health.
Despite the stress of watching her great love slip away, she still stood before the cameras and gave a vibrant performance that anchored on the year's biggest hits.
I suggest, Mr. Alves, with that situation had you and the other naysayers who so smugly dismiss Hepburn's achievement been present in 1968 you would have loudly cheered her victory that night as a long overdue tribute.
Thanks for tackling this, Claudio! I agree with the consensus that she deserved four but not for the performances she won for (except Lion). Glad to see one of my Kate faves, Adam's Rib, get some love in the comments. Given that she never showed the twelve years she was nominated: was she an Academy member?
Those final three wins indicate a voting block that held her in very high esteem, which would explain why she triumphed for two roles (Guess and Golden) that aren't considered her very best. It's not like voters in the '67 and '81 races didn't have better options that would have made better winners. And there was more than likely a contingent that felt she deserved redress for not winning for the stellar performances mentioned here.
@BlueMoon02 Appreciate you sharing that Katharine Houghton quote about Guess. She could be talking about 21st century white liberal feel-good fantasies like Crash, The Help and Green Book. The more things don't change...
Yes!
Off topic, but after YouTubing the 1981 Oscar highlights, I had this puzzling question-why did it seem like so many Oscar winners leading up to 1981 never bothered to show up at the ceremony? I’m sure that there were prior commitments, protests, age considerations, filming obligations, ‘there’s no way I’ll win, so I’m skipping it’ etc., but wouldn’t you Want to be present for one of the most important career events of your life? Seems that the studios and publicists have some muscle nowadays, but, back in the day when the Academy Awards had mega ratings, I’d be bummed if the winners weren’t present. Who wants to see ‘accepting the award is...?’ Here’s just a crash list that perhaps a future column could investigate. This trend seemed worse throughout the sixties and kind’ve stopped at 1981:
1961-No Sophia Loren
1962 - Anne Bancroft
1963- Patricia Neal, Margaret Rutherford
1966-No Elizabeth Taylor, Paul Schofield or Sandy Dennis!
1967 -Katherine Hepburn
1968 Katherine Hepburn
1969-Maggie Smith, Goldie Haven
1970 - No Glenda Jackson, George C Scott or Helen Hayes.
1972 Marlon Brando
1973 Glenda Jackson
1974 Ellen Burstyn or Robert De Niro
1976 Peter Finch (RIP)
1979 Melvyn Douglas
1981 Katherine Hepburn or Henry Fonda
To people complaining about the title, it wasn't meant as a diss or an act of disrespect towards Hepburn's legacy. She's legitimately one of my favorite actresses. I was following the sort of structure I had done for the pieces about Daniel Day-Lewis, Meryl Streep, and Paul Newman. Also, I think it's legitimate to wonder if anyone deserves four Academy Awards when so many people don't win a single one despite amazing careers and individual performances. I'm sorry that it came off as irritating.
Eoin -- Her longevity is amazing indeed. Is there any other career of equal longevity and long-lasting popularity in Hollywood history?
Cash -- It's, hands down, her best scene in Morning Glory.
Alex D -- Woman of the Year is great too. I agree that the wealth of amazing performances in her career only contributes to making her wins feel more underwhelming and unrepresentative of the actress' talents.
zooeey -- I've read many times that Hepburn lacks versatility, though I've always felt that it was a strange conclusion. Her voice, accent, and timbre rarely change (and when they do, it's usually bad), but she was capable of adapting her screen persona to amazingly different roles and films. There's a huge difference between her work in comedies like Bringing Up Baby and The Philadelphia Story, the Grand Guignol of Suddenly Last Summer, and the brittle tragedy of Long Day's Journey Into Night. Maybe she didn't disappear into roles, but she had the versatility to tackle radically different tonal registers. Could you perhaps give an example of what you consider a versatile actor?
James -- I'm sorry if I come off as combative, but your tone sounds very pointed and I don't think I wrote anything in this piece that warrants it. I love Katharine Hepburn and am perfectly aware of all those facts surrounding the making of Guess Who's Coming to Dinner. Still, a great Oscar narrative born out of personal struggles does not a great performance make. In retrospect, while her win seems logical from an "honoring an under-rewarded legend in great personal anguish" point of view, I don't think it represents one of her best acting achievements. I'm glad you think she's vibrant in the film, but I, unfortunately, see no such quality in her work.
TOM -- That is a peculiar phenomenon. Watching the 1970 ceremony must have been frustrating.
In any case, thanks for all the feedback. It's always welcome.
I'm teaming up with the "more than one Oscar is more than enough" folks.
Unless it's undeniable work, I don't get why the need to repeat.
I'd rewrite Hepburn's Oscat history to 2 wins: The Philadelphia Story (especially since Ginger Rogers should have won for Top Hat and thus also correcting Bette Davis' undeserved 1st win) and The Lion in Winter.
She's a consistent performer, not always one I warm up to, but unstoppable.on certain roles.
Bette Davis and Meryl Streep deserve more Oscars than her, period.
It's hard for me to think that anyone has ever deserved four Oscars. Seriously, spread the wealth!
Yawn... no
the golden pond win is worth it for the story jane fonda tells in her autobiography:
going into the '81 oscars hepburn had three wins, fonda two
the day after the ceremony hepburn rang jane and simply said "you'll never catch me now"