Sharon Stone Had to Convince ‘Casino’ Oscar Campaigners to nominate her in Lead instead of Supporting

What do you all think? Would she have beaten Mira Sorvino in Supporting Actress?

No, they would have never given her an Oscar, even if it was in the short subject category. So she was right to do what she did for her career.

Mira stunk out loud, though.

R1. No. They wouldn’t have given her the Oscar. Mira had the edge, with Kate, winning the SAG, possibly second (maybe Joan Allen too). In some ways, supporting actress was even more competitive. Sarandon had lead actress to herself. Stone, I think, didn’t even place second in that category.

Fascinating.

She should’ve won for Best Supporting. She wasn’t exactly the lead, though she had the only female substantial role in the film.

I'm never asking her for advice again!

Why is Sharon Stone a star? She had one hit movie in her entire career

The truth is she never would have won in Supporting either, and when someone tries to category fraud and STILL doesn’t win it’s embarrassing. So she was right to do what she did.

It wouldn't have been category fraud, though. Her role in Casino was one of the rare ones that could have been successfully argued for either lead or supporting.

Mira’s vocal affectation in Mighty Aphrodite was like nails on a chalkboard. How did she sweep all the supporting actress awards that year? Wasn’t she technically the movie’s female lead? Joan Allen and Mare Winningham deserved better.

Fucking hell, she's difficult.

Supporting that year should've gone to Joan Allen for Nixon. Kathleen Quinlan was fine in Apollo 13, as was Mare Winningham in Georgia, but they weren't quite winners.

The real robbery that year was Jennifer Jason Leigh not being nominated for Georgia. You wanna talk about an actress who never broke free of her record of playing hookers and tramps, talk to JJL.

R9 I agree but if you’re not gonna win, you’re better off “not winning” in lead. Mira sorvino was an unknown before that movie so of course she went into the supporting category. Sharon Stone was one of the most famous people in the world so being put in leading or supporting was a question of “are we finally gonna take her seriously?” Which was obviously a thing with her.

I just watched Casino last week ,and I did not see her as lead actress material AT ALL.

It was a gimmicky, bloodthirsty and her portrayal was brassy, harsh, and made NO connection with the audience or feeling empathy for the true wrench of a woman she was. He worshiped the ground she walked on and gave her plenty of leeway right up until she started whoring again.

The hair style changes were gimmicky and at no point did I see the softer side of the actress I know and love that would have stolen the show and that award!

Sharon is one of the few that actually has an air of Old Hollywood about her.

Gurl...

[Quote] Sharon is one of the few that actually has an air of Old Hollywood about her.

With an absolute failure of a career. She’s only well known because her publicist kept her on the tabloid covers for years. Jennifer Aniston is just like her

Even though Sharon has great bone structure I really prefer her with long hair. I think there's a certain hardness to her that long hair softens.

What is that phony, lousy model turned actress in soft porn and action movies talking about ? she wasn't the lead in the movie, and she wasn't good enough to win an oscar, plus, she's CONSTANTLY bragging about her craft and being a serious actress. Constantly. Look Sharon, you did a lot with what you've got,(your pussy) and these days you should stick to advertising for spectacles in europe.

I thought this stinker was the nadir of MY career. But looking back, it was the bottom of hers. She spends the whole movie crying her eyes out because her middle-aged marriage is boring.

At least I got to weather a sex scandal and do basic cable after this!

is Michael sure it wasn't Ms Stone?

Lorraine Bracco in Goodfellas was very much supporting yet was arguably a more substantial part. She gets to narrate part of the film and gets her own POV unlike Stone in Casino.

In the end, it didn't matter as she sucked in both categories.

Mira is a horrible actress and that Oscar was one of the worst ever awarded. The only reason we're not complaining about her more is because a decade later, Jennifer Hudson said "Hold my Champale" and committed the worst atrocity that category will ever see.

Totally unaware that everything she’s saying, can be fact checked

Whenever people say “ People think I’m XYZ” I know they’re lying

R18 not Ellen DeGeneres short but I do think she looks her very best with her hair chin length - like when she accepted her Golden Globe for Casino. With long hair she looks terribly generic (see: all of the 80s)

Sharon watches her Golden Globe win.

R29 she may not be the world’s greatest actress but her voice, her presence , and her dry sense of humor …she’s such a damn star.

Why don't we trundle out every dog-eared factoid and boilerplate opinion about Miss Stone and wearily express them all once again, for the zillionth time. Scintillating!

She does a lot for charity

Her face is very architecturally on point.

There was a reason why the crew on the set of ALLAN QUARTERMAINE peed in her bath water…

She's one of the truly worst actresses ever. Every line she utters sounds recited like something you'd hear in Hollywood in the 1940's. She can't even make camp sound fun like in Diabolique.

Fascinating story. /sarcasm.

She lost anyway so why is this being discussed 27 years later? Sharon Stone is such a piece of work. Who fucking cares?

We care, R37. We very much care. We're obsessed.

Old Hollywood Vagina.

Is she the actress to have not had a nosejob? Give her an award for that because that's her real achievement.

I think her jawline is a little weak. It's more apparent in profile.

[quote] The hair style changes were gimmicky

The Carol Brady wig at the end was so fake-looking and atrocious. I'm surprised they allowed that wig on set.

R41 no it’s not in the slightest. She really has the ideal shape face. Then again, this is the same board that thinks Brooke Shields has the ideal jawline in profile, so I shouldn’t be surprised, I guess.

I remember that year, Mira Sorvino was widely expected to win, it was the typical Oscar ingenue Supporting role which always wins (Geena Davis in Accidental Tourist, Angelina Jolie in Girl Interrupted), Woody Allen was still hugely respected as an actresses’ director having gotten Dianne Weist her second Oscar for Bullets the year before, and Mighty was a Miramax film. Stone would have not won in Supporting. She was wise to campaign in Lead which was, as was typical in the 90s, weak for Lead Actress.

Amy Poehler as Sharon.

1995 was hardly a weak year for lead actress. Besides the five nominees, all of whom were deserving, there were also non-nominees Kathy Bates for Dolores Claiborne, Toni Collette for Muriel's Wedding, and Nicole Kidman for To Die For, all of whom could have easily made the final five.

R7 That “one hit movie” has in Catherine Trammel arguably THE quintessential femme fatale in movie history. It’s an iconic role and an indelible image. Stone should’ve been nominated for Basic Instinct.

*Tramell

R47 only because 1992, like 1994, was one of those shit years for actresses. But in a normal year no way in hell.

These were also the years where they would nominate Susan Sarandon for a fart in Church - until she won and was never nominated again.

R46 Dolores Claiborne had three phenomenal actresses, but my favorite was Judy Parfitt as Vera Donovan. Would’ve made a stunning nomination for supporting actress.

Stone was epic in Casino. More people rewatch that performance/film than any of the other nominees from ‘95. She was also great in The Muse but no one saw that.

I think that she should've been nominated for and won supporting actress for "Bobby". I thought she was terrific in that.

The real Ginger.

She was not gonna beat Mira Sorvino but she would have actually had an outside chance. She had no chance again DL fave Sue Sarandon or Elisabeth Shue. Sue was the heavy favorite and Liz Shue was probably the dark horse potential upset with a daring deeply dark role and heavy critical backing.

I found Mira Sorvino's vocal choice much like Nick Cage's in Peggy Sue Got Married. Interesting choices because I didn't understand why. But I was wildly amused by both. I thought Mira Sorvino was hilarious in Mighty Aphrodite. It was a Woody Allen movie performance. If you don't like Woody Allen world you don't get it. I first hated and then ended up loving the Greek Chorus. I looked forward to an appearance about halfway through the movie. Over all the movie was eh but it was kind of an interesting idea. Your adopted kid's bit mother is a porn star with crazy falic decorations in her house.

[quote]“I’m not a ‘dramatic actress.’ I am a spiritual conduit.”

Unfortunately, we have no category for that, Ma’am!

I do think she’s fantastic in CASINO, though, all the way through. I love when she’s soused in the restaurant and slurring, “I wouldn’t, I wouldn’t do that if I were you… I wouldn’t do that.”

She’s great in Casino. I love when she walks around tipping all the staff. You know when DeNiro falls for her he’s fine for. She’s just an alley cat.

*he’s done for

In other BEARKING news: Bill Clinton is elected President; Rudolph Nureyev dies of AIDS; and Nirvana will appear on MTV Unplugged.

Steven Bochco wrote in his memoir that Sharon Stone was among the people he had worked with who he felt "shot themselves in the foot" career-wise because of their personalities. David Caruso and Daniel Benzali were also on his list.

^^ Bochco later revealed that he fired Benzali because he refused to leave his home before he completed his morning bowel movement and was perpetually late to the set.

Sharon Stone is the film version of Jennifer Aniston. Neither is a phenomenal actress, but they are definitely stars who capture the public’s attention. Jennifer has an Emmy, and Sharon has her Golden Globe and Oscar nomination. They should be both be happy with the careers they’ve had.

Jennifer Aniston has had a surprisingly successful movie career though. She rarely carries movies on her own but she's been in a ton of hits.

R62 ok but Jen Aniston’s popularity (aside from her high profile relationships, which SS never had) stems from being approachable and relatable, Stone’s…does not. And she’s not so much popular as manages to keep herself relevant.

Well, you really can’t compare Aniston and Stone. Aniston is a light comedienne who coasts by on being more of a personality. On the other hand, Stone has made a bunch of junk but interspersed were projects that demanded actual ACTING. And she was good in those quality projects.

Let’s just say it’s doubtful Scorsese will be hiring Aniston any time soon.

[quote]Jennifer Aniston has had a surprisingly successful movie career though

She has never carried a movie on her own name. The few hits she's had have been because of her co-stars. And 90% of her filmography is utter shit. She has one of the worst of any actress.

Stone wipes the floor with her by just being in Casino alone.

[quote]ok but Jen Aniston’s popularity (aside from her high profile relationships, which SS never had) stems from being approachable and relatable, Stone’s…does not.

Who cares? When did we want our movie stars to be approachable, every day fraus?

Give me a complex diva who walks into that room and every fucking head turns because they know they're looking at a STAR any day of the week.

If Sharon had gone Supporting Kathy Bates could have been nominated for Dolores Claiborne.

Given how Mira complained so much about being in a Woody Allen picture her Supporting slot should go to Judy Parfitt

Sharon is big into revisionist history.

R46 what am I, chopped liver?

Yes, Julianne, you are.

Any performance nominated in 1995 would have been a better win than any nominee in 1994, probably the weakest line up of nominees in living memory. I would also add Nicole in To Die For, Kathy Bates in Dolores Claiborne & Julianne for Safe.

Jessica Lange deserved a nomination but come on.

Susan Sarandon for The Client?

Jodie Foster for NELL?!

Datalounge likes to downplay Sharon Stone's performance in Casino as if she was merely serviceable. But the facts remain, for a movie star, she stole the entire film from the thespians: DeNiro, Pesci, and Woods.

If movies were released slightly earlier or then actresses could have won for their best work.

If To Die For came out in 94, Nicole wins

Then the actual best actress of 2002 wins - Julianne Moore for Far From Heaven

Then Witherspoon could have won for Wild in 2014 over Julianne's Still Alice

If The Devil Wears Prada came out a few months earlier in 2005 then Meryl wins over Witherspoon's okay-ish turn in Walk The Line

r49 Yeah, Sarandon really won her Oscar in the nick of time. Her career was just about about to trend downwards.

Or we could have just given it to Julianne in 1997 for Boogie Nights, which is the only performance she deserved it for and saved a lot of ridiculous nominations over the years.

Sarandon is an example of an actress they nominate over again then when she wins the Academy never bothers with them again

r77 I was hoping that was going to be the case with DiCaprio but he's too big of a star unfortunately.

[quote] I was hoping that was going to be the case with DiCaprio but he's too big of a star unfortunately.

He didn't deserve that Oscar nomination for Once Upon a Time in Hollywood. He was the weakest thing in a bloated, self-indulgent film.

I actually think Meryl was the best that year and her most deserved nomination of the 90s in a movie which was surprisingly brilliant, since the book was crap. And that scene in the rain at the end.

Stone doesn’t act enough. She’s better in period pieces.

Stone doesn't act enough because she's a nightmare to deal with.

To add to R74 if "Frances" came out in 1981 Jessica could have won over Hepburn for "On Golden Pond".

And aside from Prada is her last legitimate nomination R80

If Jessica won in 81 then Teri Garr or Glenn could have won Supporting in 82 instead of Jessica's "Tootsie" consolation prize. Frances was her best screen work but unfortunately came out in a year where no one was going to beat Meryl in "Sophie's Choice".

And if Four the Boys came out in 1992 Bette Midler would have an oscar.

That bitch from Howards End only won because she was British.

I've noticed that if you still haven't won after your 5th nomination (Sarandon won on her 5th, as did DiCaprio.), then it's very difficult to win afterwords. Geraldine Page was an exception (I wonder if perhaps rumors of her health played a factor in her win. Didn't she pass away a year later?).

Michelle Williams and Amy Adams, you in danger gurls. Not to mention, well, you know...

If Bette had starred in Misery she would have won! Remember when she had the cheek to say "that role won the Oscar!" Lol

[quote]She’s better in period pieces.

She's better in comedic roles.

R87 fuck off!

[quote] Give me a complex diva who walks into that room and every fucking head turns because they know they're looking at a STAR any day of the week.

Fuck I don’t disagree. I’m just saying they’re NOTHING alike to the one making that dumb comparison.

I see Glenn's Sunset Boulevard has gone from her IMDB to join Barbra's Gypsy and Faye's Masterclass in the sweet neverafter

I love Casino (and Goodfellas), when Scorsese goes it will be a real loss.

[quote]r87 I've noticed that if you still haven't won after your 5th nomination, then it's very difficult to win afterwords.

That’s right, G.

Read it and weep.

r80 that scene gets me too and I am consider myself pretty hard hearted. When her hand is on the car door handle, oooooh

R82 receipts please. That’s a defamatory accusation.

[quote]Read it and weep.

Considering it took you thirty years to win number three, you should take some of that Kleenex yourself, M.

It didn't even take me five to win my third and fourth.

Sharon Stone's "I look damn good for my age and I'm a badass woman" schtick got old 20 years ago. Today it's just tedious. But, that's all she has to offer, just her attitude. Her acting is that of someone who thinks she's much better than her capabilities can produce.

[quote] when Scorsese goes it will be a real loss.

Scorsese went decades ago. Casino was his last watchable film and Goodfellas was his last great film.

Sharon would have had a chance in Supporting but she wasn't gonna beat Sorvino. Like Courtney Love a year later she made an ego mistake. Both were supporting performances and both could have made those categories interesting but instead aimed a bit too high where they were not gonna compete.

It's incredible that DiCaprio has been nominated for 6 acting Oscars.

All her memories are false, all her tales are tall, all her instincts are basic.

R66 Are you forgetting the almost Oscar nominated Cake? Well, yes, of course you are, so is everyone else! 😁

R62 I’ve got an Emmy too bitch. Get my awards straight.

r99 I enjoyed The Irishman even though the de-aging stuff got mocked.

R99, I've rewatched WOLF OF WALL STREET more times than I can count. THAT'S the film Leo should've won his Oscar for. Maybe if you were straight you could appreciate it more. It's presents with extraordinary insight and accuracy a personality type of the heterosexual male that is absolutely primal. And THE IRISHMAN has great filmmaking all throughout it. I loved the little closed captions for each character telling us how they died.

What a stupid comment, R106. I'm gay, but that doesn't make me a fucking idiot.

R106 that may have been Leo's best performance but it certainly wasn't as great as Daniel Day Lewis as Abe Lincoln, the actual winner that year. Considering the actual nominees that year Leo was a distant second.

She sure was gorgeous. Still is.

Sharon Stone suffers from "Drag Delusion".

sharon stone is one of those brainiac nutso gonzo genius people in the best way.

[quote] I found Mira Sorvino's vocal choice much like Nick Cage's in Peggy Sue Got Married. Interesting choices because I didn't understand why.

Sorvino was just doing Miss Piggy's voice, which was wildly incongruous with her character's beauty and sex appeal. It was the classic retread of the beautiful blonde with the awful voice, going back at least to Lina Lamont in "Singin in the Rain," but it was funny then just as it was funny back with Jean Hagen.

[quote] but it was funny then just as it was funny back with Jean Hagen.

No. No it wasn't.

R107, well there's got to be SOME reason that you're a fucking idiot.

R104 she does? What for, Will & Grace?

[quote] [R107], well there's got to be SOME reason that you're a fucking idiot.

Yes, wasting my time reading posts by one.

R116, you did more than just read the post, you threw a fit and felt compelled to respond. You need to own that kind of idiocy and not try to blame it on someone else.

She would have won for Supporting,

What r9 said. I really respect her for that though. She’s a true star and a classic beauty. Too bad she didn’t pick better projects. Someone above said she only had 1 hit film. I started to agree and then remembered she was in Total Recall.

[quote] [R116], you did more than just read the post, you threw a fit and felt compelled to respond. You need to own that kind of idiocy and not try to blame it on someone else.

Are you still prattling on? Shut up already.

R108 Leo lost to McBongo when he was nominated for WOWS, not to DDL.

[quote] I enjoyed The Irishman even though the de-aging stuff got mocked.

You mean that interminable bore where the actors looked 30 but walked like 80 year olds?

In other news, Stone won AARP's Lifetime Achievement Award as part of their "Movies for Grownups" honors.

In no way was Al Pacino Jimmy Hoffa. It was awful.

R121 my mistake! Thanks you're right

I think a little of her goes a long way. She was hilarious in irreconcilable differences. She wanted to be a leading lady after basic instinct and can’t blame her for going for it. I think if she had modeled her career after Dorothy Malone or Gloria Grahame, bombshells who were supporting players but did memorable work she would’ve had a better legacy of work.