The Lone Acting Nominee vs Best Picture Stars
Saturday, March 21, 2026 at 10:00PM 
In the battle of Aunt Gladys against Best Picture stars, the witch won!
I don’t know about you, but I love Oscar trivia, the more meaningless, niche, and utterly useless for prediction purposes, the better. Indeed, matters of stats and precedent feel better invoked in post-Oscar talk than in the middle of the season, when folks sometimes hold on to these analyses as if they were unshakable rules. Every year, Academy Award history gains new records, new precursor combos that failed or succeeded, and age-old assumptions that were never examined until they were proven wrong. So, let’s roll with it and enjoy the silliness of our collective Oscar obsession. Tonight, I’d like to return to the matter of Amy Madigan’s Best Supporting Actress win.
Hers is a remarkable achievement for a number of reasons, spanning from genre bias to the sheer quality of the performance at hand. Still, even odder is the fact that the Weapons witch was a lone acting nominee facing off against a lineup of women starring in Best Picture nominees. And though we live in an era when the Academy tends to privilege the movies listed in their top race in almost every other category, Madigan came out victorious. This particular scenario has only happened three times before…
Katharine Hepburn, MORNING GLORY (1933)
And yes, one of those times comes from the very early Oscars, when Supporting Acting categories were still but a dream and the Academy nominated only three thespians per year. For the season spanning the second half of 1932 and the entirety of 1933 – still, the longest period an individual Oscar edition ever covered – an up-and-coming Katharine Hepburn won against May Robson in Capra’s Lady for a Day, and Diana Wynyard in the Best Picture-winning farrago we know as Cavalcade. In many ways, this victory represented an industry investment in someone they believed would be the next big thing. For once, that was a good hunch on their part.
That being said, Hepburn’s win for playing a promising young actress in Morning Glory hasn’t aged well. I think it’s stronger work than what earned her the second and fourth spots in her record run at the Academy Awards, but most folks disagree. Additionally, that season, Hepburn starred as Jo March in George Cukor’s Little Women, a Best Picture nominee. Some might argue this invalidates her presence on this list. Madigan didn’t benefit from a similar edge, unless I’ve forgotten a late-season surge of AMPAS love for Rebuilding. Still, this was a first for the Oscars.
;)
Mary Astor, THE GREAT LIE (1941)
It didn’t take long for history to repeat itself. But, this time, it was in Supporting Actress, the category where all such events would occur henceforth. Not that Mary Astor is playing a supporting role in The Great Lie, her victory being a good example of how category fraud has always played a part in the Oscars, even if it sometimes seems like it’s a recent crisis. At least, in this case, it led to a pretty smashing turn getting rewarded and an oft-undervalued Golden Age name being forever enshrined in the pantheon of Academy Award winners. Sure, it may not mean much, but it does confer some longevity. Astor should be remembered for this characterization of an independent pianist dealing with the melodrama of single-motherhood in the 1940s, and for many other films, like Dodsworth and Meet Me in St. Louis.
Like The Maltese Falcon, if we’re being honest about it. Because, yes, Astor, like Hepburn, may have won her Oscar for a film the Academy otherwise ignored. But, like Hepburn, she also starred in a much more popular flick, up for the Best Picture trophy in the same ceremony. How many votes did she receive for folks who wanted to honor her for both the insouciant refusal to compromise of her The Great Lie performance and the femme fatale stylings of The Maltese Falcon? It’s impossible to know for sure, yet it’s something to consider when reflecting upon this particular quartet of Oscar winners. Whatever reason voters had, Astor came out victorious against Patricia Collinge and Teresa Wright from The Little Foxes, Sarah Allgood from How Green Was My Valley, and Margaret Wycherly in Sergeant York.
;)
Margaret Rutherford, THE V.I.P.s (1963)
One thing you’ll notice is that, in the three instances when this scenario played out in Best Supporting Actress, the eventual winner was facing off against multiple women from the same movie. For Astor, they were Collinge and Wright. Madigan faced off with Sentimental Value’s Elle Fanning and Inga Ibsdotter Lilleaas. As for Margaret Rutherford, she beat the record holders for the most women nominated in the Best Supporting Actress category from the same film. They were Diane Cilento, Edith Evans, and Joyce Redman, from that year’s Best Picture winner, Tom Jones. Honestly, there’s a universe out there where Tony Richardson’s Georgian romp filled all slots in the category, seeing as Susannah York and Joan Greenwood decidedly got some votes thrown their way.
The final nominee was Lilia Skala, who actually won the Supporting Actress Smackdown of 1963 for her turn as a strict nun whose heart melts under the influence of Sidney Poitier’s Homer in Lilies of the Field. It’s also important to mention that, unlike Hepburn and Astor, Rutherford wasn’t part of any other Best Picture contender, though The V.I.P.s’ stars – Elizabeth Taylor and Richard Burton – did appear in the much-maligned Cleopatra, whose fame owes more to off-screen polemic than whatever is on screen. Also, for what it’s worth, Rutherford may be mostly forgotten nowadays, but she was a veritable vidette at that time, her stardom having shot up in the States thanks to her many big-screen appearances as Miss Marple. In any case, if any member of the vast V.I.P.s ensemble deserved Oscar gold, it was a young Maggie Smith rather than the fun and endearing, yet ultimately insubstantial, Rutherford.
Amy Madigan, WEAPONS (2025)
Which brings us to Amy Madigan, 62 years after Rutherford, victorious in a new millennium when only five lone acting nominees had won before her. For the curious, they were Charlize Theron in Monster, Forest Whitaker in The Last King of Scotland, Penélope Cruz in Vicky Cristina Barcelona, Christopher Plummer in Beginners, and Julianne Moore in Still Alice. I’m still planning on writing something about horror cinema at the 98th Academy Awards, but that must be mentioned here, too, as that genre has produced very few acting winners in the annals of Oscar history. Ruth Gordon stands out as the best predecessor to Madigan, her Minnie Castevet emerging fully-formed, from the same tradition of Grande Dame Guignol that so influences the grotesquerie of Aunt Gladys.
Even then, Gordon was more grounded than what Madigan’s up to in the wildest passages of the Weapons narrative when, crowned with her clown red wig, the villainous biddy seems like she’s performing eccentricity to convey an idea of harmlessness, using society’s penchant for setting aside such people as a key part of her plan. In some ways, rather than hide her strangeness, Madigan has Gladys exalt it through self-aware artifice, a theatricalization that leaves others in shock. This is not a matter of beckoning attachment or winning people’s hearts. Instead, it’s an act whose ultimate effect is to inspire a modicum of confusion, mayhap revulsion, a fear of the other that simultaneously dismisses it as inconsequential.
In private, when showing her real self to little Alex, Gladys is much more easily recognizable as a calculated killer, a witch whose craft is performed in ways that beckon notions of domesticity, as twisted as they might be. These contrasts are the central tenet of Amy Madigan’s turn, and they’re also what make her such an unusual Oscar winner. She makes the monstrousness familiar, while the pretense of something is where oddness lies. Basically, the inverse of Gordon, whose Minnie weaponized how commonplace her nosy neighbor schtick was, both for the audience and Rosemary Woodhouse. It’s the inverse of Kathy Bates’ Annie Wilkes, and Fredric March’s Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde. The Silence of the Lambs duo is in another league of their own, as Demme rarely indulges in the horror genre’s more stylized delights.
And still she won. Hell, Wunmi Mosaku might have been the runner-up, playing another woman some might call a witch in another Oscar-winning horror movie, for which Michael B. Jordan won Best Actor. Isn’t that amazing? While Madigan wouldn’t have been my pick from this year’s five, Teyana Taylor gets my vote for One Battle After Another – she’s a victor for the ages, and I’m just now realizing how special a win this is within the context of awards history, voting patterns, industry trends, and so on.
Nevertheless, if I were to rank the four lone acting nominees that faced off against Best Picture stars and came out victorious, Madigan would come behind Astor. Hepburn gets bronze, and Rutherford is left out of the podium.
What say you, dear reader? How would you rank these four Oscar-winning turns? Did they all deserve to win? Also, if you're interested in the history of Lone Acting Nominees, check the podcast of the same name. I've been a guest twice already!
Reader Comments (20)
Out of the weak field the right person won,Aunt Galdys is a perfomance to be remembered a la Ruth Gordon,I don't think the other 4 will be.
Sweet Margaret Rutherford has been maligned in this piece. She is a delight in The V.I.P.s. Looking at performances from a distance of six decades can cause consternation. Yet back in the day Rutherford was beloved as a pillar on Broadway and in the West End.
Remember in the 1960s Oscar sought to reward highly regarded stage actors who graced a film with their talents. Rutherford also won the Golden Globe and the National Board of Review for this film.
People often complain that comedic work is ignored by the Academy Awards. Not here. Rutherford is very funny in her 15 minutes or so of screen time. She definitely deserved her Oscar
PS Shame on the Smackdown panel. Lilia Skala is the female lead in Lilies of the Field. Category fraud!
We needed this lone acting win more than rain.
Interestingly, all 4 were in multiple movies the years they won, but only in Madigan's case did it not appear to have been a factor. Hepburn's "star is born" narrative was definitely boosted having her first four movies in the eligibility period, culminating in Little Women released at the end, with Morning Glory a better vehicle for her alone and the nominations for Wynyard and Robson likely driven by the strength of their films rather than their performances. Astor had The Maltese Falcon out the same year as The Great Lie and none of the other nominees in her category really popped. And then Rutherford had a scene-stealing performance the same year as one of her Miss Marple movies, with the three Tom Jones performances not really standing out and Lilies of the Field really just a Poitier thing. Madigan, on the other hand, was in a category with multiple contenders having some traction in an era with massive precursor and media attention, who won on the strength of a standout character and a veteran narrative in spite of the film not finding any other traction. Extremely impressive.
Praying that next year's slate is equally strong - 5 performances that would all make great winners, and all supporting roles.
Its incredible how strong AND unpredictable the category got when presumed early frontrunner Ariana Grande vacated the premises.
Mike - agreed. but unfortunately her presence for so long really cut some worthy performances off at the knees that couldn't get around her and build any traction.
Cláudio - i knew this number would be low (once you factored in the "up against performers in a Best Picture" stat) but i had no idea it would be THIS low. Wow. Madigan's triumph in retrospect feels like a much much much bigger deal than it did when she started winning things. Of course given how the Academy votes this also leads me to believe that WEAPONS was maybe thisclose to a Best Picture nomination (i.e. not far behind F1 or THE SECRET AGENT)
Nathaniel - Weapons got a PGA nomination, which to me indicates that it was very much in the Best Picture conversation. It's also worth noting that Blue Jasmine, I, Tonya, The Whale and A Real Pain also got PGA nominations, and then missed Oscar nominations for Best Picture, but still had performances that won Oscars (which gives us an indication of whether a film was in the Best Picture conversation).
OFF TOPIC:
I know Nathaniel is - as always - curious about the new Almodovar film... just saw it this morning... and while - predictably - many Spanish audiences have shrugged at it... I'm happy to report, it may very well be his very best and most accomplished film to date. I would define it - in spirit - as the bastard son of Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind and The House that Jack Built, without the sci-fi from the first and the horror elements and murders of the later. Watch out for the three musical moments - which aren't musical numbers. The first one could/should earn Patrick Criado nominations for Supporting Actor anywhere and likely will get him a lot of job offers in Hollywood (he was in "Money Heist", so not exactly unknown). The acting is phenomenal - if in an Almodovarian key - all around and this could be as huge at Oscars like Sentimental Value has been. It really surpasses in achievement what Talk to Her dared to do, and it's even more ambitious.
Personally, I think that the bare minimum Oscar-wise could be...
International (if submitted)
Original Screenplay
Score
On a second tier, quite possible:
Picture
Director
Supporting Actor (Patrick Criado, if only for THAT scene)
Cinematography
Film Editing
Casting
If they really go behind it
Actor (Leonardo Sbaraglia)
Actress (Barbara Lennie)
Supporting Actress x 3!!! (Victoria Luengo, Milena Smit and Aitana Sánchez-Gijón)
Production Design (Lanzarote!!!)
Costume
And this would totally be Pedro's Palm d'Or if he would have submitted it. Like, really. Still processing it.
Updated top 10 for Almodóvar
1. Bitter Christmas
2. Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
3. Pain & Glory
4. Talk to Her
5. What Have I done to Deserve This?
6. Parallel Mothers
7. All About My Mother
8. The Room Next Door
9. Volver
10. The Skin I live In
Jesús Alonso -- While we won't know for sure until the official announcement, I've heard from friends in the festival circuit that Almodóvar did submit BITTER CHRISTMAS for Cannes and that he's, almost surely, going to compete for the Palme again. If he does so, he'll continue his streak as the only contemporary auteur that Fremaux allows into the main competition without the stipulation of a Cannes world premiere. PAIN & GLORY was also released commercially in Spain months before its Croisette screenings.
Claudio - It would be needed a Parastie-kind of phenomenon to take Pedro down from his long awaited Palme d'Or. Like, really, after watching this one, I just can't conceive that he would lose it again. It's the time, and it's the film
Jesús Alonso -- I hear, but I also think folks might make similar arguments for Hamaguchi, Zvyagintsev, Pawlikowski, Serra, von Trier with his rumored last film, Farhadi, etc. Also, as much as I love Almodóvar and defend THE ROOM NEXT DOOR, his Venice win wasn't especially beloved by the festival-going masses, mostly seen as a career honor against stronger competition (the Delpero, Kulumbegashvili, Corbet, etc.). Then again, we'll only know the final slate of competitors in April and Cannes juries often zag when we expect them to zig. I'm still traumatized by those 2016 choices.
But also, you've made me incredibly excited to see BITTER CHRISTMAS. Reading more about it, the film seems right up my alley.
I have a Pedro box set but have only watched All About My Mother but I have enjoyed Volver Pain and Glory and Parallel Mothers of his most recent output,his 80's and 90's stuff is alien to me but i'll get through it one day.
I think the thesis is “it’s rare for a lone nominee to triumph when facing four rivals from BP contenders.”
I’d be curious to know how many times that category makeup has occurred: 4 BP representatives + 1 lone nominee. My guess is “quite rarely,” most often you have a couple from BP nominees, a couple from films with at least one other nomination, maybe a lone nominee. 2/2/1 or 3/2 or 3/1/1 or 2/3 or 1/2/2, etc.
Of ALL the times the split was 4/0/1, what percentage of the time did the lone nominee win? That would tell you whether Madigan’s win is statistically significant. If it’s above 20% she actually had an advantage going in.
“This has only happened four times!” sounds impressive unless there have only been 16-24 opportunities for it to happen, in which case it’s just baseline odds. But maybe it’s more!
DK -- Of the 381 performances that have won acting Oscars, only 30 have been lone nominees. A smidge less than 8% of all winners, and that’s if you count Emil Jannings’ win for THE WAY OF ALL FLESH, which is sadly a lost film and feels unfair here as he won Best Actor for THE LAST COMMAND too. I think you’re severely underestimating how hard it is to win when one is the sole representative of their movie going into Oscar night.
I don't have time tonight to check which of the 275 lone acting nominees were up against stars from Best Picture contenders. For this article's purpose, I investigated only those 30 who actually won. But I might do it later because I'm also curious.
If one wants to be strict about statistics, then Madigan should only be compared to folks in a five-actor lineup competing in a field where Best Picture could have 10 nominees. So that means she’s only comparable to Astor out of these four. And, speaking only of recent history, she’s the first lone acting nominee to win in the new expanded Best Picture era (2009 to today). In that context, ten other performances have been in the same situation of facing four nominees from Best Picture projects. Including Madigan, that gives us a roughly 9% success rate for this period in Oscar history. Of course, prior to Madigan, that success rate was 0%.
These lucky eleven were:
2025) Amy Madigan, WEAPONS (winner)
2023) Colman Domingo, RUSTIN
2022) Brian Tyree Henry, CAUSEWAY
2018) Willem Dafoe, AT ETERNITY’S GATE
2017) Denzel Washington, ROMAN J. ISRAEL, ESQ.
2016) Viggo Mortensen, CAPTAIN FANTASTIC
2016) Michael Shannon, NOCTURNAL ANIMALS
2015) Sylvester Stallone, CREED
2012) Naomi Watts, THE IMPOSSIBLE
2010) Jacki Weaver, ANIMAL KINGDOM
2010) Jeremy Renner, THE TOWN
This statistic just goes to show how superior she was to her competition,Aunt Gladys is now a horror icon to be discussed in years to come in Oscar and horror circles the 4 other won't be.
Christopher Plummer, Beginners (winner)
Carlos Fernández -- While Plummer was a lone acting nominee who won (one of 30 in all Oscar history), he did not do so against a lineup made up exclusively of stars from Best Picture nominees. Neither MY WEEK WITH MARILYN nor WARRIOR was nominated for the night's biggest category. Indeed, Nick Nolte is also a lone acting nominee for the latter.
If you are in need of Jalandhar escorts and you select Shruti goyal model agency, I will offer a beautiful gorgeous and attractive models. her look is stunning.
Me Arpita roy a mind blowing Independent Ludhiana call girls , If you are looking for someone who will fulfilling your inner desire and desires, then take advantages of this chance and meet my.