tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030627662498151745.post6320303457845038286..comments2023-12-26T05:26:08.512-05:00Comments on The Cinematic Spectacle: Double Feature: Separate Tables (1958) & M*A*S*H (1970)Joshhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08596682195753811295noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030627662498151745.post-18421453621035422842013-01-27T13:07:05.704-05:002013-01-27T13:07:05.704-05:00Thanks. Ha! "Oddly awful". I rewatched i...Thanks. Ha! "Oddly awful". I rewatched it, and I think Kerr's performance is serviceable to her character. I'd argue it's her character that is tough to take.<br /><br />Niven didn't deserve to win over Newman, but I'd give James Stewart the win for Vertigo.<br /><br />Sutherland wins that year? Good stuff. I see what you mean on its datedness, but I still found it funny.Joshhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08596682195753811295noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5030627662498151745.post-6514068562221324162013-01-24T17:09:12.015-05:002013-01-24T17:09:12.015-05:00Great post. I loved Separate Tables (minus Kerr, ...Great post. I loved Separate Tables (minus Kerr, who was oddly awful) but never understood Nevin's win. It was clearly supporting (ensemble if there ever was one) and while he was good, he had nothing on Newman.<br /><br />MASH is one of those films that hasn't aged well for me. It feels so incredible dated and not as funny as it intends to be. Still, Sutherland is hilarious and my Actor winner that year.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com