It's Time For Ellen Burstyn To Step Up and Step Down

I open here with the caveat that I swear I have nothing at all personally against Ellen Burstyn. Loved her in "The Exorcist." She was amazing in "Requiem For a Dream." She's a six-time Oscar nominee, and the Film Academy doesn't just hand those things out like car wash discount coupons. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said lately for the TV Academy. It seems that I've been leading the parade in expressing shock and indignation at the fact Burstyn received a Primetime Emmy nomination for supporting actress in a movie/miniseries for her "role" in the HBO docudrama "Mrs. Harris" -- this, despite the fact she was in the film for all of 14 seconds. That's right: 14. Seconds. She uttered 38 words in a weird accent. Hello, Emmy nomination!

What has been perhaps equally perplexing is the reaction of the television community to this -- that is, pretty much no reaction at all. I feel essentially like a lone voice of sanity screaming into a barren abyss. Where is the outrage? Where is the fury over the fact this charade that makes a mockery of television's primary awards showcase has been allowed to stand? Where is the humiliation at the idea that Burstyn's nomination represents foolproof evidence that no one who voted for her inclusion on the ballot actually saw the film? Where, too, is the acrimony over a Hollywood icon's decision to allow this sham to go forward? Instead of speaking up, all appear to be burying their collective head in the sands of denial.

I reiterate that I do not have it in for Burstyn. I am not an enemy of the TV Academy. I have great respect for Burstyn. I love television. I understand that the academy does its best to be fair and inclusive and just. Yet as long as Burstyn is in the audience as one of the category nominees on Aug. 27, then as far as I'm concerned the Emmys are bereft of validity and significance. They're Star Jones to me.

What disappoints me most about this is Burstyn's lack of action. She could have made a noble, benevolent (and proper) gesture by immediately withdrawing her name from contention -- not only out of fairness to the event and to those potential nominees who deserved an honest shot at her spot but out of simple respect for the acting profession. Burstyn's going along with this (if she is indeed fully aware of it) tells me that she cares less about her craft than she does hollow personal acclaim, as if a nomination honoring a mere cameo wannabe means squat.

Burstyn is better than this, or at least ought to be. But if we go back some 30 years, we see a few disturbing clues as to the actress's sometimes paradoxical mindset.

Consider that Burstyn didn't attend the 1974 Academy Awards ceremony at which she landed her lone win, as lead actress for "Alice Doesn't Live Here Anymore." Her director, Martin Scorsese, accepted on her behalf. She later reportedly admitted she stayed home because she was certain she would win and couldn't handle the pressure and attention. Huh?

As if that weren't strange enough, the following year (1975) Burstyn took to TV to call for a voting boycott of that year's lead actress category to protest the lack of good roles for women. This did not sit terribly well with Louise Fletcher, who was up that year (and would go on to win) for "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest." Fletcher took it as a personal slap in the face. Burstyn said she meant nothing against Fletcher. But it was also known that Burstyn had been forced to turn down the "Cuckoo's Nest" role that went to Fletcher due, it was said at the time, to her then-husband's illness.

As Fletcher told the New York Times, "(Burstyn) hadn't even seen 'Cuckoo's Nest' because she felt it would be too painful an experience. I told her on the phone that I thought it would have been nicer if she had said what she said in a year when she had been nominated." Touche'.

So if Burstyn acted back in 1975 with a certain jealousy and bitterness, which isn't so massively far-fetched, then it's probably also not such a stretch that she could demonstrate some selfishness/nonchalance now with regard to her meritless Emmy honor. Once again assuming this is anywhere on Burstyn's radar -- impossible to confirm since her publicist refuses to return multiple phone calls seeking comment -- it's the equivalent of spotting a wallet on the street filled with $500 in cash and picture ID and figuring, "Oh well, finder's keepers." The Emmy nomination found her, and she's keeping it, righteousness be damned.

Maybe Burstyn just hasn't bothered to give this any thought. To be sure, Burstyn, at 73, isn't having a lot of trouble finding work. This is not about an aging performer's need to cling tightly to faded glory. Her acting career is thriving. She has 20 credits just since the turn of the millennium, including five in 2006 alone (four of them features). Of those 20, the smallest by far is Burstyn's part in "Mrs. Harris," which again wasn't so much a role as a disappearing act.

I would expect more of an actress who was the first female president of The Actor's Equity (1982-85) and a co-president of The Actor's Studio. But then, maybe Burstyn sees this as a matter of having to hoard every under-ripe orange that drops from the tree, uncertain as to when it will stop bearing fruit. On her IMDB.com biography, this quote is attributed to her: "It's unfortunate, but our society is such that, for women in Hollywood, you get to a certain age and just fall off a cliff. But in my case, I refuse to die. I will hang on, by a little finger if necessary."

It doesn't appear to be Burstyn's little finger that's in play here but her middle one.

Ellen Burstyn photo courtesy WireImage.com.

Comments

[Lance Mazmanian]

Ray, I couldn't have said it better.

I for one will never understand how anyone, in any field of endeavour, can abide receiving a hollow victory/accolade of any kind.

I personally think it's a worse scenario than receiving nothing at all.

L.

[Vance]

Maybe the TV community, like me, has just pronounced the Emmys completely dead and irrelevant and not even worthy of the discussion after this year's horrific nominations (Charlie Sheen? Kevin James? Seriously?).

[Cheryl]

I'll be outraged with you. There should be some kind of rule about the amount of time one has to be on screen before one can be nominated.

[Josh]

Good for you! This is beyond the ridiculous. Why HASN'T she stepped forward to say something about how stupid this nom is? She must know her cameo (it's barely long enough to call it THAT), while fine for what it is, is NOT Emmy-worthy. Far from it. I have always been a big fan of hers until now, but I must say that this has me very, very disappointed. I just can't imagine that there could be any positive motive involved with her keeping mum and not challenging the Academy on this. This is an outright insult to actors everywhere. What is the point of the Emmys at this point? Is there any?

[OldOldLady Of The Hills]

Ray, my dear...I'm having a very hard time with this one. Because like you, I admire Ellen Burstyn's work very very much. I don't know her except in the most peripheral manner going back many many MANY years...when she was a member of the same Theatre Group as me, and her last name wasn't even Burstyn, then....
I just cannot believe that a woman who has so much integrity as a performer and respects the craft and 'art' of acting the way she does, would not have something to say about this, BUT, maybe not publicly...She is obviously a shy person. Retiring, almost, EXCEPT when it comes to her work. Maybe I am incredibly naive here...but, I feel there has to be some logical explanation for her silence.
Could it be that she is very very ill and that the Emmy's are not foremost in her mind???
Could it be she is out of the country and in a remote place where this kind of "news" hasn't reached her yet?
Gee, I wish I knew someone who knows her now, today. Because, I cannot believe from what I know, that she would not at the very least, say something, EXCEPT.....except, that she did NOT--as you said--go to the Oscars the year of "Alice" is a BIG clue, to me. She thought she would win and didn't go because of the pressure?? Shy and retiring, in person. She went to the IFA Awards for her stunning performance in that drug movie that you mentioned, didn't she? And she won! She went to the Academy Awards that very same year, the next night, for...and didn't win.
Ellen Burstyn has never been a seeker of publicity, God knows!
Well....all I'm saying is: I have to believe there is an explanation for her silence on this very strange nomination. So sue me.

[UrBestGirl]

Good for you is right! I see AP just picked up on the story...right on! And every new story I see echoes you by saying "calls to Burstyn's publicist were unreturned." Wow...if I were Burstyn, I think I'd be looking for a new publicist.

Thanks for starting the fire...hopefully it will rage on until SOMEBODY ponies up, be it Ellen or the Academy, and tell us what they have to say about this ridiculous debacle!!! Here's Dave Bauder's AP piece:

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/mercurynews/news/breaking_news/15227768.htm

[Suzanne]

Ellen Burstyn did not attend the Oscars because she was appearing on stage in NYC in her Tony Award-winning role in Same Time, Next Year and did not want to miss an evening's performance.

[GB]

OK...but what does that have to do with anything? The question is, WHY HASN'T SHE SAID ANYTHING about her current Emmy nomination? Doesn't make sense. She can't possibly think this is right or acceptable, can she? The Academy should really be shaking in their boots over this one. Ultimately THEY are to blame for this. Ms. Burstyn is getting all the bad press for the time being (which, in my opinion, she could have nipped in the bud had she just issued a "WTF???" statement about this telling the Academy "no thanks" for the meaningless nom)...but what I'm waiting for is for someone to really put the TV ACADEMY's head on the chopping block for this. Their system is obviously so flawed that the entire ceremony/award itself appears to have been rendered entirely irrelevant by this debacle, which should NEVER have been allowed to happen. Such a travesty!!!!

[Robert C.]

There is absolutely no denying the fact that Ellen Burstyn is one of America's greatest actresses...just watch her performance in Requiem for a Dream (2000), WOW, the ladies still got it, no doubt!
14 seconds or 14 hours, who cares anyway? the Emmy's lost any prestige they may have had several years ago. Their ridiculous nominations (and those left out) get more absurd every year.
Lets just say winning an Emmy is about as exciting as finally getting to that prize in the bottom of the cereal box!

[Joe]

You claim you have nothing against Ellen Burstyn, yet you say this:

"What disappoints me most about this is Burstyn's lack of action. She could have made a noble, benevolent (and proper) gesture by immediately withdrawing her name from contention -- not only out of fairness to the event and to those potential nominees who deserved an honest shot at her spot but out of simple respect for the acting profession. Burstyn's going along with this (if she is indeed fully aware of it) tells me that she cares less about her craft than she does hollow personal acclaim, as if a nomination honoring a mere cameo wannabe means squat.

"Burstyn is better than this, or at least ought to be. But if we go back some 30 years, we see a few disturbing clues as to the actress's sometimes paradoxical mindset."

Sounds like your claim of not having it in for her is a bit disingenuous. Why is it incumbent upon her to do anything? She never even submitted her name for consideration. HBO did. Your beef should be with HBO for shamelessly going after all the awards and accolades it can greedily grab. Burstyn did nothing wrong. And she doesn't have to do a damn thing.

Blame the voters for not watching her work honestly and judging it to be unworthy of nominating. Blame HBO for its cravenness. Blame the Academy for its oversight. But leave the actress alone. She's getting victimized in this tempest in a teapot by people who assume she's masterminding some grandiose scheme for glory. All she did was make a cameo in an HBO movie, without giving it a second thought. That she's nominated for it is ridiculous, to be sure. But since she didn't mastermind the nomination, why must she actually do anything about it? That's the Emmy's damn problem, and not among the least of them.

[Ms. G]

I TOTALLY disagree with Joe. First off, I also don't have any personal problems with Ellen Burstyn. She's a good actress as we all know. And yes, it's true that Ms. Burstyn didn't cause this truly unfortunate situation. But she's not deaf dumb and blind, is she? She has a brain, yes? A conscience, even? One would think she would be as upset about this mess as anyone, and should have been all along, because what's the point of even BEING nominated if there's no way you could possibly enjoy winning? A) Her performance doesn't warrant a nomination, and B)it's obvious that those who voted didn't vote for her performance--merely her name. How rude that the Academy couldn't be bothered to actually WATCH the performances they're voting for? While it's true that Ms. Burstyn should have never been put in this position in the first place (for which she can thank HBO, the TV Academy and its apathetic voting members), there's nothing positive that could have come from her just sitting by and keeping the nomination without a peep to anyone. She hasn't made any sorts of statements in the media about this, right? I haven't heard of her saying anything, anyway. And I don't get it! I agree with Mr. Richmond here--she should absolutely have said something. Then, maybe she would have received some GOOD publicity, instead of being what you see as "victimized" by this. But I have to say, from what I can see, she's no victim. She could have seized control of this situation by being the respectable actor she is and spoken publicly about it, BEFORE anyone else had the chance to. I have to agree with one of the earlier posters on this blog, that the mess she's in now, she had a part in creating -- since she has chosen to keep quiet -- I guess in the hopes that she just MIGHT have won? That's just not right...any way you slice it. I don't care how big of a fan you are. It's just not the honorable thing to do.

[Theodora]

She's a strange bird --to be sure...

There've been performances lauded that were, at best, ODD... And others that should've gotten recognition.

Just because an actor is "Method" oriented doesn't make them GREAT... Only belabored.

Lee's been dead, what, three decades now? His students need to give up the ghost --and create characterizations --instead of defaulting to the "Joey Tribiani Smell The Fart" technique...

I haven't seen Ellen's recent work --but the character she created on her short-lived TV series was a little too halting to be 'credible'... Which is probably why the show evaporated into the ether.

[Blah]

It's not the amount of time that matters. It's what one does with it that should count.

More people than not win acting awards based actually on just one moment in a film anyways, regardless of how much screen time they have throughout the film. You know, it's the "Oscar Clip Moment" so to speak.

Good acting is good acting. It doesn't matter if it lasts 14 seconds or 14 minutes.

[RICHELLE FLORES]

I LOVE ELLEN BURSTYN SHE IS MY FAVORITE ACTRESS SHE DESERVE AWARD NOMS FOR EVERY MOVIE SHE MAKE EVEN THE WICKER MAN AND BOOK OF DANIEL. PEOPLE ARE JUST JEAOLSE AND MEAN BEACAUSE SHE IS STILL WORKING AND IN HIGH DEMAN EVEN DARREN ARONOFSKY ASKED HER TO BE IN HIS NEW MOVIE THE FOUNTAIN! SHE IS STILL BEAUTIFUL AND DOESN'T LOOK HER AGE I HOPE SHE KEEPS MAKING MOVIES SO ME HER BIGGEST FAN CAN SEE THEM IV'E SEEN 31 OF HER FILMS AND I LOVE THEM "SO PLEASE LEAVE HER ALONE AND LET HER MAKE HER MOVIES