Last night all four acting award winners won for movies that didn’t take home a single other award.
George Clooney for Syriana; Philip Seymour Hoffman for Capote; Reese Witherspoon for Walk the Line; and Rachel Weitz for The Constant Gardener.
It’s not all that unusual for all four winners to be from separate movies, but is this the first time all four acting winners won for movies that won no other awards?
It seems if you add 2 other categories - Best Director and Best Film - it becomes even more unusual. All 6 winners in those categories are from six different films.
(Granted some of those 6 films might have won another Oscar for, oh let’s say “Best Assistant Gaffer”.) However, this might have been the first time that the 6 major category Oscars went to people involved with 6 different films.
It may have been the first time it happened to that extent, but there’s nothing odd about a truly great movie having no Oscar-worthy performances (think every movie Kubrick ever made) or a mediocre movie with a performance that gets a statuette (Louis Gosset Jr. for An Officer and a Gentleman, Martin Landau for Ed Wood, Sean Connery for The untouchables).
It freaks me out a little that X2: X-Men United had two Oscar laureates in its cast, and Sir Ian McKellen wasn’t one of them.
That’s true for wolf_meister comment, but doesn’t answer my question, since in each of those years (which are, BTW, the years of the films not of the Awards) a film an actor won for also won another award.
Still, in order to answer the OP’s question, are we sure that in 1969, “True Grit” only won for Best Actor and no kudos were awarded for that film’s hair stylists, costumers, gaffers, clapper loaders, focus pullers, etc ?
I did a preliminary search of the major categories to narrow it down; then I listed all winners for the two years and seached in MSIE for the name of the film to make sure it only came up once.