Todays younger audiences might not recognize this petite woman in the gray wool coat and the Tintin sweatshirt.
Well, they should.
Her second Oscar came three years later for the romantic comedyA Touch of Class, costarring George Segal.
Credit: JILLIAN EDELSTEIN for EW
But she doesnt mince words when asked about what they really mean to her.
Nothing but base metal underneath.
Jackson, obviously, is a woman who says what she thinks.
On this day, Jackson is speaking her mind on any number of topics.
After decades in Parliament, she still loves the scrimmage of debate.
The Oscars, of course, come up.
ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: What goes through your head when you think about the two Oscars you won?
GLENDA JACKSON:Well, I jib at the idea that I won them.
I did nothing apart from what the job I was given.
If there was a winner, it was the people who voted for me.
My sardonic view is that theyre not as important as everyone thinks they are.
What was the moviemaking experience like for you, especially in the beginning of your career?
The camera is so obsessed with what youre doing.
Theyre not looking at you.
But that concentrated energy into the area of light is a palpable force.
But its not a vainglorious energy, like for some ultimate reward?
No, its an energy you could use.
They werent earned in that sense.
Though the films you were in, likeWomen in LoveandSunday Bloody Sunday, were small, intimate dramas.
They needed and deserved the spotlight that they received from the Oscars.
I dont disagree but that was in the early 70s.
The Oscars have been transformed into what they are now.
They have much less to do with cinema.
They are about frocks and the whole shebang of nonsense.
Nowadays, it seems like the real competition is between the different award shows.
Now the coverage is ludicrous.
You didnt go to the Oscars any of the four times you were nominated.
And I was just so impressed.
One was the efficiency with which they pulled it off.
On both sides of the stage there was this colored tape for taking people to television and media.
It was so well organized.
And the other thing I found quite fascinating was the sense of excitement before the envelope was opened.
It was really potent and intense.
And you know what?
The minute the envelope was opened, nobody gave a toss.
Right, fine, whos next?
What about the lasting cultural value?
Wouldnt you say that the award shined a light on social issues?
See, you cant.
Who won last year?
Who won the year before?
Does it make one scrap of difference?
At the time, it does, yes.
But thats not how human beings are.
We enjoy the glitz of the moment, which is what it is.
But how can you say that12 Years a SlaveorSelmahas caused a fundamental cultural shift?
And then you have these black guys being shot by policemen.
Would that the Oscars could change the world but, Im sorry, it just aint true.
Ignoring the Oscars, do you think movies have the power to cause cultural shifts?
Well, perhaps a couple of them have over the years.
It would be nice to think, because film is such a powerful medium.
But it is not transformative in a way that wed all like it to be.
Little by little, baby steps, it has been transformative over the years.
These shifts are tiny, incremental, hopeful but they can be wiped away so easily.
Do you see lots of movies these days?
But Ive always been obsessive about books.
Im of an age now where I tend to reread quite a lot.
And quite interestingly I find that I read biographies.
I never used to read them before, it used to just be fictional novels.
Im a big fan of detective fiction.
David McCullough did a terrific book about Truman and Im reading that again.
He also didJohn Adams.
Yes, that was on HBO.
You basically helped invent longform TV withElizabeth Rin the early 70s.
But there was an audience, yes, especially since it had to do with dead long gone Royals.
But it has changed.
And the standards of many of those programs are very high, the writing especially.
What do you like on TV?
American television has been extraordinary.
