Some thoughts on Kate Winslet

Kate Winslet is a superb actress and deserves most of the recognition she is receiving for her performances. Much has been said about the fact that she has been nominated for so many Oscars without ever winning the thing. There's a very good reason why she hasn't won -- while she turned in wonderful performances, she never gave the best performance of any one year.

The same is true for her 2008 film work. It's a shame that the Hollywood Foreign Press Association felt it had to bend over and give Ms. Winslet two Golden Globes, not because she deserved them -- she didn't -- but because they felt she had gone trophy-less long enough and was trying to goad the Motion Picture Academy into follow suit with some hardware. I'm hoping the Academy doesn't get sucked into that "Well, I guess it's her time" argument, although it has often handed out many Oscars for exactly that reason.

I'm also hoping the Academy doesn't fall sway to Harvey Weinstein's fanatic push to have Ms. Winslet nominated for a supporting performance in "The Reader." Anyone who sees that film must realize that is NOT a supporting role, it is the lead role, much more of a lead role, in fact, than, say, Frances McDormand's was in "Fargo." Weinstein bought that undeserving GG nomination for Ms. Winslet and I know he's lobbying the actor's branch of the Academy for the same kind of double Oscar nomination.

The problem with awarding someone because someone feels they have been shortchanged in their career is that it robs more deserving actors of the recognition they have earned -- in this case, actors such as Penelope Cruz and Anne Hathaway.

I am hoping Academy voters, unlike the whores in the HFPA, will recognize talent and not decide to give the Oscar to someone out of feelings of guilt and regret. Plus it would be criminal for the Academy to do for Ms. Winslet what it would not do for the much more deserving Peter O'Toole.