Can being pregnant help Helena and Cate to win Oscars?
It's very possible that the women who'll win best actress and supporting actress at the upcoming Oscars are both currently pregnant. Can that boost their Oscar chances?
Supporting actress frontrunner Cate Blanchett ("I'm Not There") just announced that she's due next April. Helena Bonham Carter ("Sweeney Todd") expects to give birth in December. Of course, that means Carter won't be waddling down many red carpets with a watermelon belly this Oscar season, but she'll nonetheless be generating lots of loving attention and sympathy as a new mum.
Much was made of Eva Marie Saint being pregnant during 1954's Oscar season right before she won. However, she probably didn't need help. She was competing with a lead role in the supporting category with a film that swept 8 categories, including best picture, ("On the Waterfront").
However, starring in 1999's best-picture sweeper "American Beauty" didn't help very pregnant Annette Bening, who lost best actress to Hilary Swank ("Boys Don't Cry").
Nontheless, Rachel Weisz had a noticeably protruding balloon belly when she won supporting actress for "The Constant Gardener."
Below, in the comments section, our poster "starbucks10172" notes: "If I'm not mistaken, preggers winners have won in best supporting actress every few years in the 00s. Marcia Gay Harden in 2000, Catherine Zeta-Jones in 2002, and Weisz in 2005. Hopefully, Blanchett or Carter -- when she drops (to) supporting -- will continue this rather odd pattern."
I recently asked our forum posters about derby contenders who are mommas-to-be and got lots of curious responses:
LKMOSCAR: "It probably won't help Halle Berry."
Seanflynn: "Does Jennifer Lopez and her predicted twins double her chances for El Cantate? Is that how this works?"
Iskolar: "Catherine Zeta Jones was also very very pregnant when she received her Oscar. Marcia Gay Harden on the other hand failed to do so. For every pregnant winner, there's also a pregnant loser. So I say no. I think it even works better at the Emmys where after pregnancy, one gets an Emmy [in the case of Jamie Pressly and Mariska Hargitay]."
Tomk: "Too bad Heath Ledger wasn't pregnant after BBM, although if I recall correctly, his girlfriend was."
Dannyboy: "I don't think it makes any difference in the world. And if it does, it most certainly shouldn't. For every pregnant winner there's at least two that lose."




Marcia Gay-Harden was not pregnant when she won the Oscar in 2000. She was very much pregnant when she was nominated for Mystic River, but not when she won for Pollock.
Posted by: Beau | November 08, 2007 at 01:07 PM
You forgot to mention Meryl Streep was expecting when she won for Kramer vs. Kramer and Sophie's Choice.
Posted by: Radiofool | November 08, 2007 at 11:17 AM
If pregnancy is the key to winning, then won't Juno sweep everything?
Posted by: AJ | November 07, 2007 at 08:05 PM
If I'm not mistaken...preggers winners have won in Best Supporting Actress every few years in the 00s. Gay-Harden in 2000, Zeta-Jones in 2002, and Weisz in 2005.
Hopefully Blanchett or Carter--when she drops supporting--will continue this rather odd pattern
Posted by: starbucks10172 | November 07, 2007 at 07:40 PM