Features
Headlines
Search
Archives
Like last year, this year’s Best Supporting Actress race was a free-for-all when it came to the last spot. Potential category confusion almost had two spots up for grabs. And there was absolutely no shortage of possible spoilers once the BAFTA had spoken up with a slate of formidable possibilities.
And great work was still left off the ballot. Mila Kunis was on track to score, but ultimately fell short. Veterans Barbara Hershey and Miranda Richardson seemed to be making a play for recognition, too. In the end, an early campaign made all the difference for one indie contender, while another young hopeful managed to keep her grip in the supporting ranks despite giving a lead performance.
The nominees are:
Amy Adams, “The Fighter”
Helena Bonham Carter, “The King’s Speech”
Melissa Leo, “The Fighter”
Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit”
Jacki Weaver, “Animal Kingdom”
Unlike last year, however, this field anything but decided. The neck-and-neck nature of the race will naturally make it one of the most interesting ones to follow throughout the second phase of the awards season. And for the most part, it’s difficult to argue with this field.
Amy Adams wasn’t at the top of too many lists going into the season, if only because word was that her co-star, Melissa Leo, had a juicier role and stole the show. But ultimately what we got out of Adams in “The Fighter” was something we’ve never seen before, and a head-spinning portrayal as a result. Eschewing her bright-eyed good-girl persona for a tough-as-nails Lowell bartender with a heart of gold, the actress couldn’t have been more surprising. Racking up her third nomination in just five years, Adams has proven her range with this performance, one that actually outshines her co-star if only because she gives what could have been merely a plot device character a natural complexity and a vigorous hidden spirit. I’d keep my eye on her for a potential shock on Oscar night.
One film that clearly had the Academy’s heart this year was “The King’s Speech,” which hauled in 12 nominations across the board. One of them has been considered a good bet since day one, perhaps less due to the merit of the work than the expected coattail ride on a front-running contender. But what Helena Bonham Carter does in the film really shouldn’t be undercut by the realities of an awards season. She adds a delicate humor and balance to the piece and provides, in fact, an emotional anchor for Colin Firth’s King George VI that is hardly a phoned-in portrayal. Not every performance is meant to be breathless, after all, and the grace of simplicity is as difficult to master as the usual intense emoting that earns accolades. As a result of love for the film, she could be a spoiler.
The frontrunner going into the race is clearly Melissa Leo, who flies off the rails in “The Fighter” in such a way that demands attention and tends to earn awards. It’s a showy performance which chews the scenery, but the irony is Leo (and the other actors tasked with portraying colorful characters) actually held back a bit. The Ward family is actually MUCH more colorful. But Leo has lapped up a Critics’ Choice Movie Award and a Golden Globe already. She may well take the SAG prize, too. But even that kind of haul wouldn’t seal the deal, I think. There are a lot of textures to this race, and one of them is the idea that Amy Adams could pull attention away from Leo as the circuit moves forward. Nevertheless, the safest place to put your chips is right here.
There was a lingering possibility going into this year’s nominations announcement that Hailee Steinfeld would receive enough lead actress votes to either land her in that category or divide her potential altogether, leaving her out of the mix. Thankfully she made it, even if it’s in the wrong category. In “True Grit,” this first-timer really lit up the screen opposite some of the industry’s most respected actors. She commanded unique language and cranked out a persona of unflinching justice and honor, giving a fully realized portrayal that felt entirely authentic. As a result, and considering the healthy nomination haul for the film, I think she could be a spoiler to watch for on Oscar night. To say nothing of the fact that she drives so much of the film, she simply makes for one of the best narratives of the season.
Rounding out the category is the spot which seemed to be up for grabs. Ultimately it was Jacki Weaver who nailed it down for her eerie portrayal of a mild-mannered Lady McBeth in the Aussie drama “Animal Kingdom.” Weaver’s campaign got off on the right foot as the film was one of the first screeners to hit voters’ doorsteps. She pulled off a National Board of Review win at the start of the season and boy, those T-shirts were all the rage. It’s understandable why actors gravitated to her work as the subtlety is intriguing and the character is fascinating. But I never felt that Weaver lifted it off the page and gave it a life that wasn’t already inherent. Nevertheless, who could begrudge her her success? She’s in the club now after working hard for years, but the nomination will likely be her reward.
Will win: Melissa Leo, “The Fighter”*
Could win: Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit”
Should win: Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit”
Should have been here: Lesley Manville, “Another Year”
Check out my current rankings for this race at its dedicated Contenders page here.
Who do you think deserves to win the award for Best Supporting Actress? Have your say in today’s sidebar poll!
*This prediction updated 2/24/2011.
[Photos: Sony Pictures Classics, Paramount Pictures]
129 responses so far
1 1-26-2011 at 10:20 am
Will said...
I’m on the Jacki train 100%
2 1-26-2011 at 10:20 am
Speaking English said...
Melissa Leo, “The Fighter.” A searing, terrifically meaty performance that gives the actress all the room to show off her talent. She becomes that character in such a way you simply can’t wait to see her back on the screen.
3 1-26-2011 at 10:22 am
Sam C. said...
As much as I adored and loved Steinfeld’s performance in True Grit, I can’t bring myself to root for her to win. A deserving performance, yes, but with such flagrant category fraud would just be offensive to the 3 working actresses she’ll likely best. Poor Melissa Leo.
4 1-26-2011 at 10:22 am
red_wine said...
Will win: Melissa Leo, “The Fighter”
Could win: Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit”
Should win: indifferent, not really a fan of any of them
Should have been here: Olivia Williams, “The Ghost Writer”
5 1-26-2011 at 10:24 am
Speaking English said...
Oh, and I have to totally begrudge you for mentioning Manville as “Should have been here.” Save it for the Lead Actress post, please.
6 1-26-2011 at 10:29 am
amanda said...
I liked Steinfeld a lot, and I have no problem with her being nominated in Sup. Actress, but for her to win in a category that she shouldn’t be in is just wrong. You cant and shouldn’t compare a performance that is in almost every scene of a movie to ones who aren’t. The performance is good, but she shouldn’t beat out true supporting actresses.
7 1-26-2011 at 10:30 am
MovieMan said...
Will win: Hailee Steinfeld, “True Grit”
Could win: Melissa Leo, “The Fighter”
Should win: Amy Adams, “The Fighter”
Should have been here: Chloe Grace Moretz, “Kick-Ass”
8 1-26-2011 at 10:31 am
sam said...
Amy adams has long deserved to win and between her and Leo — I think they both give equally great performances — but it is Adams — who should have already won already for Junebug and doubt that I hope that she will finally win her much deserved oscar. I was not all that impressed with hailee, she’s good, but not oscar worthy.
9 1-26-2011 at 10:33 am
Maxim said...
Steinfeld is in a category of her own (no joke intended). She was truly acting when so many were merely performing.
I think Amy Adams is becoming overrated and I say this as someone who loved her earlier work.
10 1-26-2011 at 10:35 am
Gabriel said...
Will win: Steinfield
Could win: Leo
Should win: Amy Adams
I won’t give that one to Steinfield, because it is not a supporting performance, and that bugged me.
Amy Adams had shown a part of her range she never had. It is her third nomination in 5 years and this only prove that she is one of the best emergent actresses (well, not that emergent today). Her subtle, but efficent, performance in The Figther deserves an Oscar in my opinion. Of course, I know it is not her year (maybe the actors will she her love at the SAG + BAFTA but I doubt that), but Amy Adams had once again shown her particular talent and confirm her status in Hollywwod!
11 1-26-2011 at 10:35 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
“Save it for the Lead Actress post, please.”
I consider her a supporting actress in a film that is very much “about” Tom and Gerri.
12 1-26-2011 at 10:36 am
len said...
Why are all of you hung up on hailee not being nominated for best actress — anthony hopkins won best actor for what is largely a supporting role in the silence of the lambs, rachel weiz won for the constant gardner for a lead role in a supporting category. all fans should be happy she was even nominated– look at julianne moore — who the studio or her insisted on being nominated for lead and she came up empty handed when clearly she had a better chance here in the supporting category. i don’t think Hailee should win in either category.
13 1-26-2011 at 10:36 am
Matthew Starr said...
Can someone explain how the voting system works post nominations?
I know for nominations that each group gets to vote for best picture and also for their group (editing, sound mixing etc.)
Is it the same process for voting on the nominees as well? They get a second ballot and vote for best pic and also in their group again?
14 1-26-2011 at 10:37 am
Justin said...
I hope Hailee wins, even if it was just a “here’s a script, read it, and action!” kind of performance. Something about her presence struck me as unique. And child actors are never given enough credit.
Haven’t seen Animal Kingdom, but the two ladies in The Fighter struck no emotional chord with me. Just a bunch of blabbing, hitting, and saying “fuck” a lot.
15 1-26-2011 at 10:37 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
I don’t get taking the category fraud thing so far as to begrudge someone a win. Let’s say the best performance of the year, in your opinion, is a lead. And it’s nominated for supporting. So you would deny that performance an Oscar simply because it was placed in the wrong category?
Outrageous.
16 1-26-2011 at 10:37 am
Hans said...
I’m glad you’re doing this series again! Great writeup. Rewatched Black Swan on nominations eve, and I really wish Mila had been here, as I really admired her subtle not-really-antagonist performance on second viewing. Hopefully this opens more doors for her as I really like her whenever she pops up in a movie (Forgetting Satah Marshall, Date Night).
Like Nolan’s snub, however, I’m glad that Kunis wasn’t left off in favor of any superfluous nominees and that it is a real testament to the number of quality female contenders this year. I haven’t seen Weaver, but the other four are just terrific. Leo is a bit chewey for me, but I still couldn’t be helped but be fascinated by her (and that hair!).
17 1-26-2011 at 10:37 am
Guy Lodge said...
Will win: Melissa Leo, “The Fighter”
Could win: Jacki Weaver, “Animal Kingdom”
Should win: Honestly, I feel another viewing of both films could be the deciding factor between Leo and Weaver.
Should have been here: Kristin Scott Thomas, “Nowhere Boy”
18 1-26-2011 at 10:38 am
len said...
matt — The entire academy votes for the winners — the most votes win and they must rank the top 10 movies in order of their preference.
19 1-26-2011 at 10:40 am
Mark Johnson said...
I completely agree! I have Steinfeld winning, with Leo as the big threat. Steinfeld was the best part of a film that received the 2nd most noms. Enough said. …for now…
20 1-26-2011 at 10:41 am
Matthew Starr said...
Ok so they rank their top ten pictures but only choose one from every other category?
Also doesn’t it seem a strange process that editors nominate the editing awards but then to pick winners EVERYONE can pick who wins editing?
21 1-26-2011 at 10:42 am
Gabriel said...
@Kristopher
Well, it is not entirely the reason I wouldn’t vote for Steinfield.
I’ve really prefered Amy Adams, perhaps I was suprised with her ”anti-casting” performance. But don’t get me wrong, I would have vote for Adams!
22 1-26-2011 at 10:43 am
Gabriel said...
Should have been here: Miranda Richardson ”Made in Dagenham”
23 1-26-2011 at 10:43 am
Collin said...
It’s important to note that Steinfeld did not put herself in Supporting–voters chose to place her there. Yes, the studio campaigned for that slot, but it was ultimately the voters who made the choice. She shouldn’t be punished for category fraud. Bottom line is, I’m hoping she takes it, she was absolutely terrific.
24 1-26-2011 at 10:46 am
Sertan said...
I think Steinfeld will win this just because that’s the only top-6 category where True Grit, movie with 10 nominations, can win! I have a feeling that they will give the award to Steinfeld to reawrd the entire movie!
I’d rather see Amy Adams win this award. Even though Melissa Leo is good, I believe I liked Amy Adams’ performance better. Less showy, but more memorable (especially that scene with C. Bale in front of her door!)
I agree with Kris that Manville belongs to Supporting category. But again who would you kick out to have room for her? All these five supporting ladies are good! Maybe Steinfeld could be moved to Best Actress but again who would be out??? I really like the acting categories this year! All 20 deserve their nominations (Renner is at the bottom of the list though!)
25 1-26-2011 at 10:49 am
SC said...
@len Hopkins going from supporting to lead was, if anything, disadvantaging himself, putting himself against people with far more screen time. People who pretend to be supporting, on the other hand, are giving themselves an unfair advantage.
Anyway:
Will win: Melissa Leo
Could win: Hailee Steinfeld
Should win: Melissa Leo
26 1-26-2011 at 10:49 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
“Also doesn’t it seem a strange process that editors nominate the editing awards but then to pick winners EVERYONE can pick who wins editing?”
Now you understand why certain things are predicted to win and what’s taken into account. The Academy at large doesn’t know from good sound mixing, sound editing, etc.
27 1-26-2011 at 10:50 am
JJ1 said...
Should win: Amy Adams.
Could win: 4 of ‘em.
Will win: absolutely NO idea, but not Weaver.
12 noms means they LOVE The King’s Speech. HBC is a veteran. She could get it if eveyrone is splitting.
Steinfeld most likely will get it because she’s young, great, a “story”, and TG has 10 noms.
I want Adams, but I think it’ll be HBC or Steinfeld. Leo ….. not buying the Academy going for her, even though I love her.
28 1-26-2011 at 10:52 am
JJ1 said...
And on Manville ….. I went Supporting for my personal line-up (and win), because …….
… even though the film becomes very much so about her in the end, so much of the film is about Tom, Gerri, and all of their friends (each friend gets a large set piece). And Manville is not in the film for sizeable clips throughout. It’s very marginal, but I went Supporting.
29 1-26-2011 at 10:57 am
Matthew Starr said...
The main reason Manville was not nominated was Another Year did not register at all this year. It came out way too late. If SPC had released it around the same time as say Animal Kingdom and they campaigned Manville like they campaigned Weaver then we might be looking at a different story.
30 1-26-2011 at 10:58 am
Nicolas Mancuso said...
It’s interesting that you personally advocate for Lesley Manville in supporting. I definitely understand your thinking… but I find myself flopping back and forth over whether she should be lead or supporting. I’ve decided (for now) that she is one of three leads in “Another Year”. Guy’s reasoning makes the most sense to me: how Tom and Gerri are the principal characters who serve as a sounding board to facilitate Mary’s development and progress as a character.
Nevertheless, she could have been nominated in either category, and it would have been legitimate. It’s not the same as Steinfeld, who was clearly *the* lead of her film. I think Manville’s category placement is entirely subjective.
Either way, I’m very sad that she was left out, though not surprised after the way the precursors went. I saw “Another Year” only this past Sunday, but I’ve thought of little else since then. Mary (and Manville) have gotten under my skin and burrowed into my soul. I have a friend who *is* Mary, down to the details. It was a very unsettling experience to see my friend up there on the screen, as if Mike Leigh and Lesley Manville knew her as intimately as I do. This film means more to me as a result, and feels exponentially more relevant. A complete masterpiece.
In terms of the line-up we got, I think Melissa Leo will, and should, win — though I have yet to see “Animal Kingdom”.
31 1-26-2011 at 10:59 am
RichardA said...
Voter’s chose to put Hailee Steinfeld for the win. And this really reflects on the 10 nominations that True Grit has. Which makes True Grit a scarier threat to The King’s Speech than the The Social Network. TSN can’t even get the nod for Andrew Garfield. So, for the academy, True Grit has a strong and willing support to win–EVEN IF they have to knowingly recategorize Hailee Steinfeld.
Guess what other movie had moved a best actor to best supporting for a win and eventually win Best Picture?
Ordinary People.
Support for True Grit is scary.
32 1-26-2011 at 11:00 am
N8 said...
”… potential shock on Oscar MORNING”?
Haven’t heard that term before. Are you watching the show from Europe?
33 1-26-2011 at 11:01 am
JJ1 said...
Well said, Nicolas Mancuso.
I, too, can not stop thinking of Manville (I saw it Sunday, as well). My thoughts on why I see her being (barely) Supporting are above, as well.
34 1-26-2011 at 11:03 am
JJ1 said...
Manville’s Mary is just soooo “that” person that we all know in our own lives. i.e., a trainwreck that tries to act as normal as possible in public, yet you can only imagine how they truly are by their lonesome selves.
35 1-26-2011 at 11:06 am
bluemoon02 said...
“But I never felt that Weaver lifted it off the page and gave it a life that wasn’t already inherent. ” Am sorry but would u mind elaborating alittle on what u meant by that sentence? Just abit confused.
36 1-26-2011 at 11:06 am
Matthew Starr said...
Hmm I just realized if Guy watches the nominations over lunch then what time is he watching the awards? He must have to pull an all nighter on Oscar night/morning.
37 1-26-2011 at 11:13 am
Wheels said...
I don’t begrudge Steinfeld the nomination, because I think she was fantastic and it’s nice that she was recognized. It helps that the only dark horse I cared about (Weaver) made it in, and the likely victim of this category fraud was Mila Kunis, who I never felt deserved the nomination.
The issue I have with lead-in-supporting category fraud, though, is that I think it’s already difficult to compare one performance to another, so all the extra screen time is an unfair advantage. I’m happy for the girl, but I can’t cheer for her to win. I’m hoping a supporting actress wins Best Supporting Actress.
38 1-26-2011 at 11:15 am
Joel said...
Steinfeld’s placement in the Best Supporting Actress category likely bumped out Mila Kunis, Barbara Hershey or some potential shocker nominee whom very few people were expecting.I think the ONE person who can really praise Steinfeld’s category fraud placement is Michelle Williams. She should be extremely thankful that Steinfeld’s nomination fell the way it did or she would have likely been left out. I guess the universe has a way of evening itself out, doesn’t it.
39 1-26-2011 at 11:17 am
Indiana said...
I think Weaver will be a surprise victor here. This catagory loves surprise wins
40 1-26-2011 at 11:21 am
Guy Lodge said...
Matthew: Yep, I always do. The Oscars followed by a big breakfast — can’t imagine it any other way.
41 1-26-2011 at 11:21 am
amanda said...
First of Steinfeld gave a good performance yes, but it is no way the performance of the year. Second yeah no matter how good it is she should win for SUPPORTING actress with her LEAD role. How can you even compare her performance to the other actresses? The fact that some don’t get it is idiotic.
42 1-26-2011 at 11:29 am
JJ1 said...
“But I never felt that Weaver lifted it off the page and gave it a life that wasn’t already inherent. ”
Whoever said this from above, I completely agree with.
Fine performance, nothing that screamed Oscar nom to me. But Weaver seems like a lovely woman; good for her.
43 1-26-2011 at 11:35 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
Oscar night, that should say. Though Oscar morning is what I’ve called the day of the nominations announcement for a decade now, so it’s not totally foreign (and it was clearly stuck in my head from yesterday).
44 1-26-2011 at 11:36 am
RichardA said...
I think we’re post-performance now. I think it’s now in a phase where the Academy is deciding whether to spread the awards to a few movies or will it back one movie to take the sweep.
45 1-26-2011 at 11:56 am
San FranCinema said...
Should have been here: Dale Dickey, “Winter’s Bone.”
Then we could have had a trifecta of “monster mothers” battling it out with an “MTV Girl.”
46 1-26-2011 at 12:00 pm
Antonio A said...
Amy Adams could be a nice surprise, maybe she’ll take it over Leo.
47 1-26-2011 at 12:05 pm
Keith said...
Yes, I absolutely would refuse to vote for the best performance of the year if it were placed in the wrong category. The award is for “Best Performace by an Actress IN A SUPPORTING ROLE;” Steinfeld’s performance isn’t in a supporting role, so she doesn’t get my vote in this category.
48 1-26-2011 at 12:21 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
That’s foolish. Not least of all since the nature of category placement can be such a subjective thing. If you have the chance to award the year’s best performance (again, hypothetical), you should do so.
At least that’s my perspective, anyway.
49 1-26-2011 at 12:37 pm
Paul Outlaw said...
Will win: Leo
Could win: All five
Should win: All five
Snubbed: Kristin Scott Thomas, Nowhere Boy
50 1-26-2011 at 12:37 pm
DylanS said...
I saw “Animal Kingdom” the other night. I loved the film, but in regards to Weaver’s performance, I was quite a bit underwhelmed. She’s certainly effective, but far from the best thing about the movie. Ben Mendelsohn’s performance Is far more impressive, I think.
51 1-26-2011 at 12:58 pm
Cameron said...
Will Win: Melissa Leo
Could Win: Hailee Steinfeld
Should Win: Hailee Steinfeld
If I ran the Oscars:
Barbara Hershey, Black Swan
Mila Kunis, Black Swan
Melissa Leo, The Fighter
Jackie Weaver, Animal Kingdom
Olivia Williams, The Ghost Writer
52 1-26-2011 at 1:03 pm
Cameron said...
@ Dylan
Totally agree. Weaver was great as a supporting player, but Mendelsohn was electrifying.
53 1-26-2011 at 1:08 pm
Maxim said...
Steinfeld should have competed in Lead but screwing her over because she was voted by other people into supporting category isn’t right either.
54 1-26-2011 at 1:27 pm
/3rtfu11 said...
I’m rooting for two women. Helena Bonham Carter and Melissa Leo since both women have a previous failed Best Actress bin – I can’t see Leo winner making much difference in her career overall but it could and will for Bonham Carter who hasn’t been on anyone’s radar in quite awhile.
Amy Adams is playing Janis Joplin – this is why I don’t want her to win in this category. If she were always supporting actress then fine give it to her now. But she’s young enough that they won’t mind giving it to her for lead once she breaks through into that category. Look at Michelle Williams now.
55 1-26-2011 at 1:28 pm
JFK said...
This is indeed a very exciting race. I’ve been pulling for Amy Adams since day one, warning all those riding the Melissa Leo train to not count her out and the result, she earns an equal nomination every step of the way. Given that it has gone to Leo as of late, it would be awful to begrudge her this last achievement. However, I agree that Adams has that capability.
While I loved Steinfeld’s peformance, it is very much Oscar’s practice to deny the prize to young new-comers, so I’m going to stick with that.
Finally, Jacki Weaver’s performance is nothing short of stunning. If it weren’t for the small nature of Animal Kingdom, I would say she is a shoe-in, but I think you’re right Kris, in saying the Award for her will be the nomination.
I don’t really have much to say on Helena Bonham-Carter’s performance, other than it doesn’t bode will to poo-poo recognition for your performance.
56 1-26-2011 at 1:40 pm
Kel D said...
Jacki Weaver is this year’s villainous supporting acting winner after Javier Bardem, Heath Ledger and Christoph Waltz
57 1-26-2011 at 1:59 pm
Danny said...
I agree: Jacki Weaver could win.
58 1-26-2011 at 2:04 pm
Joe7827 said...
Keith (#47) makes a certain sense. Rules are rules, after all, and that’s the title of the category. It’s not like I’d give Aaron Rodgers a Cy Young just because I think he’s the best person in the world at throwing a ball.
59 1-26-2011 at 2:41 pm
matsunaga said...
Will win: Amy Adams, “The Fighter”
Could win: Helena Bonham Carter, “The King’s Speech”
Should win: Helena Bonham Carter, “The King’s Speech”
Should have been here: Lesley Manville, “Another Year”
I’ll stick with Bonham Carter due to split votes between Leo and Adams… Plus her simple yet affecting performance for TKS…
I also think Steinfeld can pull off a win for the love in True Grit, but are they ready to give an Oscar to a young actress? And I agree with the one who commented that she should be in Lead Actress category therefore the Academy should vote for a REAL supporting role…
60 1-26-2011 at 2:45 pm
Edward L. said...
Just a comment in favour of Helena Bonham Carter: I agree with Kris that she provides an emotional anchor for Firth’s portrayal, and I’d add (as a Brit) that she makes for a very plausible young Queen Mum-to-be. I don’t think she’ll win this year, but I wouldn’t have a problem with it if she did.
61 1-26-2011 at 2:47 pm
Robert Hamer said...
“I don’t get taking the category fraud thing so far as to begrudge someone a win. Let’s say the best performance of the year, in your opinion, is a lead. And it’s nominated for supporting. So you would deny that performance an Oscar simply because it was placed in the wrong category?”
Yes, yes I would. They are entirely different accomplishments, and to say otherwise – in my opinion – displays an enormous amount of disrespect for the types of performances that are supposed to be competing in that category.
I agree that these things can be subjective (Mark Ruffalo, Christian Bale, etc.), but you don’t even think Mattie Ross is a supporting character, so why even bring up that argument? Some frauds are so blatant that they are evident to just about anyone who isn’t cowtowing to Oscar politics, and that kind of dishonesty (which I realize is not Steinfeld’s fault, but Paramount’s) should not be rewarded.
62 1-26-2011 at 3:03 pm
JJ1 said...
The Steinfeld issue is simple with me. I don’t find her “Supporting”. I was really impressed with her performance, though. And she’s in my personal Top 10 for Lead (in 10th).
Though, she impressed, I think Portman, Bening, Moore, Kidman, Williams, Swinton, Emma Stone, Lawrence, and Kim (“Mother”) gave better performances.
So the idea of her winning in Supporting – and it very well may happen – will be a slight bummer for me. Adams, Leo, HBC … they gave great supporting performances in my mind.
On an upnote, I think Steinfeld is talented and cute as a button. And far worse people have won in the past (lead, supporting).
63 1-26-2011 at 3:04 pm
Patryk said...
Will win: Steinfeld
Could win: Leo
Should win: Steinfeld
Should have been here: Barbara Hershey, Miranda Richardson, Blake Lively.
64 1-26-2011 at 3:18 pm
Derek 8-Track said...
I chose not to choose Steinfeld on the sidebar because she deserves Lead.
65 1-26-2011 at 3:23 pm
Mike M. said...
I really want Helena Bonham Carter to pull off an upset and take this home. I’m not betting on it, but attention could be divided between Adams/Leo/Weaver/Steinfeld, whereas I wager HBC has smaller but unwavering support.
She’s been criminally underrated throughout her career, and this win would be a bit of justice for a sensational talent.
66 1-26-2011 at 3:37 pm
Danny King said...
I’d also argue that Weaver’s performance doesn’t do much to expand an inherently interesting character, but I’d say that Ben Mendelsohn’s work in the same film does exactly that — he reaches some unsettling heights.
Out of the selected five, I think I’d go with Leo, but my overall choice for the category would be either Kunis or Fanning.
67 1-26-2011 at 4:01 pm
Andrej said...
Kel D:
Yeah… but I’d say Jeremy Renner in The Town keeps that tradition alive stronger.
Will win: Melissa Leo, The Fighter.
Could win: Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit.
Should win: Hailee Steinfeld, True Grit.
Should have been here: Mia Wasikowska, The Kids Are All Right.
68 1-26-2011 at 4:13 pm
Danny said...
I’m glad to finally read some support for Helena Bonham Carter. I thought she was spot on, subtle, affecting, very believable as the young version of the Queen Mum (the way she carried herself) and perfectly calibrated emotionally. Plus she’s been sensational before, esp. in her previous nominated performance “Wings of a Dove”. However, Leo, Adams and Steinfeld are all deserving – and I still need to see Weaver.
69 1-26-2011 at 4:40 pm
Anna said...
“I don’t get taking the category fraud thing so far as to begrudge someone a win. Let’s say the best performance of the year, in your opinion, is a lead. And it’s nominated for supporting. So you would deny that performance an Oscar simply because it was placed in the wrong category?”
Umm, yeah. Because the award is for Best SUPPORTING actress. Even if she was that much better than everyone else in the category (which she isn’t by any means), she has like 2 hours of screentime in her movie to show her stuff while the other actresses have like 30 minutes? That’s just an unfair comparison and it shouldn’t be rewarded.
On top of that, it’s not like if Steinfeld had been placed in LEAD, she would’ve actually had a chance at winning. So it’s not like she’s being robbed of anything.
70 1-26-2011 at 4:40 pm
Craig said...
Good write up Kris.
I think this category will be a fun one this year. Leo, Adams and Steinfeld would all be worthy winners, and any of them could win at this point. Haven’t seen Weaver, but will watch Animal Kingdom soon. As for Bonham carter, she is the anchor for Firth’s performance, but that kind of performance rarely, if ever, wins awards, so I don’t think she’ll be a major player.
71 1-26-2011 at 4:46 pm
JJ1 said...
One other reason I’d support a Helena Bonham Carter win is – the woman always manages to stick out; to be memorable – and always in a good way.
Room with a View – who IS that dark young girl? I can’t keep my eyes off of her. And she’s pretty darn good, too!
Lady Jane – held her own as a Lead.
Maurice – perfect supporting role.
Hamlet – another good one.
Howards End – wonderful performance. Nom-worthy.
Frankenstein – very memorable.
Mighty Aphrodite – stellar.
Wings of the Dove – what can I say? Win-worthy.
Fight Club – fantastic supporting turn.
Planet of the Apes – she stuck out.
Big Fish – memorable as the one-eyed witch.
Conversations with Other Women – great performance, great chemistry with Aaron Eckhart.
Corpse Bride – great voice-work.
All the Harry Potters – where she’s most widely known, believe it or not; as the wild, murderous Bellatrix Lestrange.
Sweeney Todd – Nomination-worthy.
And this year, Alice in W. and The King’s Speech – one character that pops, one character that is subtle.
She’s had a long, successful career. She always makes an impression; and she happened to do it TWICE this year in 2 very different roles.
She’s fun, witty, well-liked, and wonderfully odd. I just think she’s a great, versatile actress who would be deserving if AMPAS loves her, the movie (enough), appreciates the subtleties she lent in TKS, and pops up through the other 4 contending women.
72 1-26-2011 at 4:58 pm
McAllister said...
I disagree about Weaver’s performance not lifting off the script. Look at when she visits Mendelsohn and Ford in jail… we see her vulnerability for the first time (even after we saw her cry) and then again, her character she reveals a completely new dimension when she meets with the lawyer in the last act. We see her go from passively controlling her family and circumstances to actively and aggressively taking the reins. The last few moments in the grocery store and in the last shot, she goes from headstrong villainess to completely surrendered.
73 1-26-2011 at 5:06 pm
matsunaga said...
JJ1:
I would like to add her small screen time but convincing Bellatrix Lestrange in HP7: Part 1… Though yes, she was one of the saving grace in Alice in Wonderland…. We’re at the same boat for her…..
74 1-26-2011 at 5:30 pm
AN said...
Funny how this argument of *category fraud* is like the Energizer Bunny (yep, you know the rest).
The Academy has pulled this kind of stuff as far back as I can remember. This happens to young talent all of the time, & I don’t see them planning to change, so I’m just accepting the fact that Hailee’s nominated & moving on. No use crying over spilled milk folks…
For those of you thinking that her age/newcomer status would affect her winning–
Two words: Tatum O’Neal.
End of story.
Hat’s Off to Miss Steinfeld.
75 1-26-2011 at 5:39 pm
Conor said...
To all those saying that people shouldn’t vote for Steinfeld because of category fraud, was it HER choice to be campaigned as supporting?
76 1-26-2011 at 5:46 pm
JJ1 said...
Well, a general consensus of people in the 1,205 actors branch bought the studio’s push for Steinfeld to be Supporting and voted accordingly.
I’d like to think that a portion of AMPAS (however hefty or small) would not vote for her to win, either because she’s not the best (subjectively) or because non-actors in the Academy know when there IS category fraud; and won’t fall for it.
77 1-26-2011 at 5:48 pm
Robert Hamer said...
@ AN: So, because it’s been done before, that means it’s okay to continue doing it? Great logic.
@ Conor: No it wasn’t, and I’m certainly not harboring any personal grudge towards her (that belongs to Paramount and the idiot critics’ groups who went along with it). However, that *does not* mean she deserves to win. Best Supporting Actress is a specific type of prize for a specific type of accomplishment. Period.
78 1-26-2011 at 5:55 pm
matsunaga said...
As for me, I’m not blaming Steinfeld for being nominated in a category she doesn’t belong… What I’m just saying is that the Best SUPPORTING Actress should go to a supporting role…
And it’s been a long while since there was a young talent who won in the acting category and they might as well give it to the older talents… And the fact that it was a category fraud, it might be a factor…
79 1-26-2011 at 6:16 pm
DylanS said...
JJ1: I think if any branch is going to take offense to category fraud, it would be the actors themselves.
80 1-26-2011 at 6:31 pm
JJ1 said...
I would agree. I just wonder how many of those 1,205 “will” care and not vote for her because of it; no less 5,500 total.
I think AMPAS (like many of us) have fallen in love with Steinfeld and won’t care, but it still doesn’t make it seem altogether fair.
81 1-26-2011 at 6:38 pm
DylanS said...
I doubt she’ll lose any votes that she hasn’t already lost to supporters of Leo, Adams, Weaver or HBC. I almost wonder if the academy is past the category fraud issue at this point and is just accepting things as they are.
82 1-26-2011 at 6:47 pm
JJ1 said...
This is true.
83 1-26-2011 at 6:53 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
“They are entirely different accomplishments, and to say otherwise – in my opinion – displays an enormous amount of disrespect for the types of performances that are supposed to be competing in that category.”
This is such a stupid comment. Don’t affix your own fucking meaning to my words, please. “Disrespect?” Jesus.
The point is “category fraud” is subjective. I have my thoughts on the performance. I think it’s a lead. It should have been nominated there. It wasn’t. I’m not going to attempt to retroactively “fix” that by not voting for a performance when I clearly think it’s a better portrayal than the other five.
Seriously, I can’t get my head around people thinking that way. It makes NO sense to me. And, frankly, puts way too much on the wording of things. It’s like you’re a damn robot.
84 1-26-2011 at 7:01 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
Marlon Brando sure as shit gives a supporting performance in The Godfather. If it were up to this lot, Sacheen Littlefeather would have accepted on behalf of one of the other actors (whose names you don’t even remember, I’m betting).
85 1-26-2011 at 7:10 pm
Sarah El said...
While it is tough to really compare Hailee Steinfeld’s lead performance against everyone else’s in the category, it does give her more of a headstart as she’s got more material to base an opinion of her off of (which, alternatively, is one of the many reasons Helena Bonham Carter has no chance and why I wouldn’t hold my breath for Amy Adams either who, while brilliant, really wasn’t as visible as Melissa Leo, Christian Bale, or Mark Wahlberg in the film). I’ve still yet to see Animal Kingdom, but I am behind any of the nominees really as they all gave great performances and all really deserve to be there. But, and likely because Hailee’s performance was a lead, I’m pulling for her most because she was able to and did give so much.
86 1-26-2011 at 7:12 pm
Sarah El said...
What I should have elaborated is what I mean by “visibility” is a combination of screen time and general scene domination in said screen time. Melissa Leo and Amy Adams, for instance, probably have about equal screen time, but Melissa Leo’s is, like her fabulously snubbed costuming, larger.
Because, obviously, actors have won before in the supporting categories for limited screen time, but that’s usually because they’re a) Judi Dench or b) chewing the scene crazy and (maybe) well.
87 1-26-2011 at 7:14 pm
Andrej said...
Maybe they should fusion the leads and supporting roles in two 10-nominee categories that are just “Best Actors” and “Best Actresses”, and pick two winners out of them. It’s a very vanilla way of doing things, but at least it takes the ‘is it a lead or a supporting role’ dilemma out of the way completely.
In other news, I’m kidding.
88 1-26-2011 at 7:14 pm
Chad Hartigan said...
If I seem a little silent from these boards from now on it’s because I’ve only seen 8 of the 41 films nominated for Oscars and so my opinion is basically worth jackshit.
89 1-26-2011 at 7:14 pm
JJ1 said...
Well, I had stated before that I like Steinfeld a lot. I was impressed by the performance. I think it’s a Lead performance.
I feel (though I have no basis for it, honestly) like non-actors in AMPAS could vote for someone else because they see it as category fraud. This IS 5,500 people with differing opinions.
BUT that’s just a totally unqualified feeling/hunch/whatever. I could be dead wrong. And I don’t have an ounce of AMPAS knowledge that Kris and others have.
90 1-26-2011 at 7:23 pm
JJ1 said...
Love how frank you are, Chad. haha
91 1-26-2011 at 7:38 pm
Robert Hamer said...
Uh, okay Kris, since you (once again) cannot seem to handle disagreement from me without taking it personally, I didn’t “affix” any meaning to your words. I’m becoming increasingly confused with how to honestly express my opinion without a furious reaction from you.
The Best Supporting Actress award is for actresses who supported their films. Hailee Steinfeld didn’t do that. Yeah, yeah, “category fraud” is subjective, I grant you that. But you don’t think she’s a supporting performance either, and yet you *still* think she should be given an award for something that isn’t meant for her. Saying that she is SO amazing that she deserves an Oscar, any Oscar, without heeding what its actually meant for…how can I not take that as a big ‘screw you’ to the other legitimately supporting nominees?
It has nothing to do with how “good” she was, or “retroactively fixing” anything, it has to do with what the award is for, and what Steinfeld actually accomplished. It’s no less absurd than if a screenplay based on a book won Best Original Screenplay. No matter how good it is, it was recognized for something it didn’t do.
Look, I have nothing personal against her. Obviously a 14 year-old newcomer isn’t going to bite the hand that feeds her (in this case, Paramount) or jeopardize her chances at major publicity. It’s unfair that her first Academy Award nomination has an asterisk attached to it, and I hope she has a long and successful career. But that doesn’t change the fact that she has a clear and unfair advantage over her competitors.
92 1-26-2011 at 7:48 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
Disagree all you want. Don’t leap to the clearly offensive stance of stating that I “disrespect” something. Everyone else was somehow able to make their argument without going there.
Maybe it’s just your personality or something. But it set me off.
“…how can I not take that as a big ‘screw you’ to the other legitimately supporting nominees?”
It’s quite simple. For whatever reason you chose otherwise.
“It’s no less absurd than if a screenplay based on a book won Best Original Screenplay.”
No. Not in the slightest, actually. One element is subjective. The other is not. And regardless of whether I think she’s lead or not, the fact is she is where she is and it’s due to subjective reasons.
I can prove to you, beyond a shadow of a doubt, that “Winter’s Bone” is based on a book. I can’t prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that a performance is supporting or lead. I can only state my case for believing one way or the other.
By the way, “The Social Network” wasn’t based on a book. It was a script written apart from said book through original research (to go by what Sorkin says). But guess where it is? Point being, at the end of the day, it’s politicking and posturing (they’re sure selling a bunch of those books with the TSN stamp on them). So maybe I just don’t care enough about the minutiae of the stated “purpose” of the award to parse things like you are. And when it comes to performances, it’s about which performance is better, in my book. The rest: whatever.
93 1-26-2011 at 7:49 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
And one more note: the screen time argument doesn’t wash, not least of which because screen time does not designate category placement in my book.
94 1-26-2011 at 7:54 pm
DylanS said...
Well, I think we ought to rule out Geoffery Rush under that logic, clearly a second lead there. Just look back over a list of previous winners (which Steinfeld isn’t even, as of yet) and you’ll see that this has happened many many many times before. This is nothing new, it happens every year, and it happens for a reason. Category placement is incredibly subjective, and if a majority of academy members think she’s a supporting actress, then they’re allowed to think so. I actually think your argument is a bit disrespectfull to them. They’re not braindead morons casting blind votes, they’re adults who made a conscious decision to place a performance in the category THEY, not you, felt appropriate.
95 1-26-2011 at 8:20 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
Who’s argument, Dylan?
96 1-26-2011 at 8:25 pm
Robert Hamer said...
Actually, a few commenters *did* go there, calling advocacy for her to win “unfair comparison,” “offensive,” “just wrong,” and “idiotic” on this thread alone. So I guess it is just my personality. Which is fine, I don’t expect or demand that everyone like me. I would, however, appreciate a small benefit of a doubt when responding to my points.
Now, why do you keep harping on the “subjective” thing? If we were debating, say, Lesley Manville or Mark Ruffalo I would totally agree with you on that point. But we’re talking about a contender that you, I, and everyone else here agrees is a lead. I wouldn’t waste my time trying to prove to you beyond a shadow of a doubt that Steinfeld is a lead.
I also take exception to your idea that the screenplay distinctions are not at least somewhat subjective. Besides you strangely undercutting your very own point with The Social Network (which is still an adaptation by the way, adding additional research and material to a screenplay which was not actually written “apart from said book” to my knowledge, does not make it any more “original” than There Will Be Blood was for changing 90% of Upton Sinclair’s novel), there was also the debate over Bright Star’s categorization last year. That wasn’t even my point, anyway.
I guess what bothers me about your assertion is that you darn well know that Steinfeld is a lead, but you’re arguing that there’s some sort of legitimate grey area about her placement when (at least between you and me, and nearly everyone else on this site) there clearly isn’t.
97 1-26-2011 at 8:31 pm
Robert Hamer said...
@ DylanS: Okay, I’ll rule out Geoffrey Rush as well, and if he was a threat to win I might be more miffed about it. And where did you get this idea that I think they’re “not allowed” to place her in supporting? They have every right to nominate her wherever they want, but that shouldn’t stop me from criticizing their decisions.
Plus, I seriously disagree that your implication (forgive me if I’m wrong) that they didn’t follow the pack on this one. Anyone who knows about groupthink and the Asch conformity experiments will tell you that it’s *easy* for a large group of people to follow along with consensus, even against their senses.
98 1-26-2011 at 8:40 pm
Hans said...
With regards to the Marlon Brandos and Anthony Hopkins and the like performances out there, I will say that I think it is a lot harder for a supporting performance to compete against true leads, just as most assume that a lead performance against four supporting performances gets more time to strut their stuff.
Random q: what order are you going in for these cats, Kris? I recall last year you left the more up in the air categories for last (cinematography, original screenplay), so I was surprised to see this one pop up as the inaugural column.
99 1-26-2011 at 8:41 pm
DylanS said...
Haha, Robert’s, not yours, Kris.
100 1-26-2011 at 8:45 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
I couldn’t really understand which argument amanda was making, so I let “idiotic” slide. And thinking it would be “offensive” to the other actresses, by way of a generalization, is a lot different than “to say otherwise – in my opinion – displays an enormous amount of disrespect.” In my view.
I’m debating the subjective thing because it matters. And I bring up Brando for you once more. The best performance in the category is the best performance in the category. It shouldn’t be docked because of a subjective issue.
Or should Caine have taken it for “Sleuth?”
I’m also not undercutting my point with the TSN thing. I’m using it as an example of the fact that, ultimately, the placement in these fields isn’t some “pure” thing, so why try to be so “pure” about voting when it comes to this stage.
“which is still an adaptation by the way, adding additional research and material to a screenplay which was not actually written “apart from said book” to my knowledge, does not make it any more “original” than There Will Be Blood was for changing 90% of Upton Sinclair’s novel”
No, it’s not. I don’t think you have all the facts. And you’re TWBB example doesn’t make any sense whatsoever. PTA sprung from the book to his story. There was no book when Sorkin was writing. And there was no (according to him) exchange of ideas and info. Original.
“I guess what bothers me about your assertion is that you darn well know that Steinfeld is a lead, but you’re arguing that there’s some sort of legitimate grey area about her placement when (at least between you and me, and nearly everyone else on this site) there clearly isn’t.”
Not my problem that this bothers you. I’ve made it pretty clear that I merely think it’s stupid to dock a performance that is better than the competition in its field due to little more than a technicality. It is where it is. I guess in my view, there is no further fight to be had.
At least we can agree that the Academy followed the pack on the placement. Shame on them. Not on Steinfeld.
101 1-26-2011 at 8:48 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
Hans: Last year I went in order of their presentation the year prior. This year, same thing. Order of their presentation at last year’s Oscars.
102 1-26-2011 at 9:00 pm
Ryan said...
Ugh! Hailee Steinfeld is so grossly overrated for her performance in “True Grit.” She got the job done, sure, and certainly didn’t detract from the film, but by no means is it a great performance or award-worthy. I don’t think she deserves a nomination either. I really resent the Academy’s affinity for child actors, which often takes precedence over who truly deserves the nominations and wins.
103 1-26-2011 at 9:03 pm
Robert Hamer said...
Okay, I’ll grant you The Social Network, partially for the sake of argument and partially because I misunderstood what you were originally saying. If I find the same info you did, I’ll be more than willing to concede that point.
“…placement in these fields isn’t some “pure” thing…”
I agree, but that was never my contention in the first place. I don’t begrudge Christoph Waltz’s win or Mark Ruffalo’s nomination because I acknowledge there’s a very real split on what type of role they played. That’s not the case here.
“Not my problem that this bothers you.”
Nor did I suggest it was.
“The best performance in the category is the best performance in the category. It shouldn’t be docked because of a subjective issue.”
But the very idea of “best performance” is in itself subjective! Why are you judging one criteria as “stupid, when it’s no less opinion-based than thinking the performance is “better?”
104 1-26-2011 at 9:04 pm
Robert Hamer said...
“At least we can agree that the Academy followed the pack on the placement. Shame on them. Not on Steinfeld.”
Excellent point, and one that I wouldn’t dispute in the slightest.
105 1-26-2011 at 9:11 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
“That’s not the case here.”
Clearly it’s up for intelligent debate.
“But the very idea of “best performance” is in itself subjective! Why are you judging one criteria as “stupid, when it’s no less opinion-based than thinking the performance is “better?””
You’re right, fuck the Oscars. Fuck the lot of awards presentations. (You basically made my point with that, by the way. It doesn’t matter enough to pretend these things exist in absolutes.)
106 1-26-2011 at 9:21 pm
Silencio said...
I’m pretty passionless at the moment. Still sour about Gosling. Gimme a week or two, I think.
107 1-26-2011 at 9:23 pm
Robert Hamer said...
Gee, the producer of True Grit and the guy who’s paid to get as many Oscar nominations for his films as possible is arguing for the path of least resistance for Steinfeld? I never would have guessed!
“You basically made my point with that, by the way. It doesn’t matter enough to pretend these things exist in absolutes.”
No, I didn’t. At all. My original comment not only acknowledged subjectivity in category placement, but the very comment you blew up over was prefaced with “in my opinion.” I never pretended that this existed in absolutes.
The point that I was trying to make was that the idea of “I won’t vote for her because she has an unfair advantage over her competitors and does not warrant a ‘supporting’ award” is not “stupid” or “outrageous” or “foolish.”
108 1-26-2011 at 9:55 pm
Mike M. said...
Aside from her category fraud, I’d argue that Steinfeld isn’t that great in her film. She competently handled challenging dialogue, and surprised a lot of people because she’s so young. A lot of the times, she sounds like she monologue-ing instead of verbalizing thought.
109 1-26-2011 at 11:23 pm
Kristopher Tapley said...
Robert: Regardless of obvious motive, as I stated, it’s a smart argument and a valid one that I think he really believes.
“The point that I was trying to make was that the idea of “I won’t vote for her because she has an unfair advantage over her competitors and does not warrant a ‘supporting’ award” is not “stupid” or “outrageous” or “foolish.”
Well, “in my opinion” (since those are apparently the magic words), it most certainly is.
110 1-26-2011 at 11:38 pm
Robert Hamer said...
Apparently, so is “disrespectful,” which appears to be a horrible insult to you that launches personal attacks…but not “stupid,” “outrageous,” and “foolish.” Got it.
111 1-27-2011 at 12:07 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
It’s about your little “you’re disrespecting the other performances” stretch, but you’re not hearing me, so whatever.
And I’ll let you have the last word, since clearly you crave it. So, take it away…
112 1-27-2011 at 12:22 am
bluemoon02 said...
I hope Amy Adams wins! Or there will be a tie between her and Melissa Leo and they can duke it out onstage on Oscar night in character. Grrrrr.
113 1-27-2011 at 12:55 am
Robert Hamer said...
Appreciate the gesture, Kris, even if it’s tinged with condescension.
I won’t even bother continuing to address your individual arguments, since that seems to be going nowhere, so I guess I’ll take this opportunity to express how much I think it’s really unfortunate how we can’t ever seem to express our disagreements in a civil manner. I’m able to tell other film writers (including Guy) that I think they’re wrong and have a perfectly reasonable discussion come out of it, but with you (and only you, it seems) it quickly – no, immediately – turns vicious. And I truly have no idea why. Maybe I did something to piss you off some time ago and you still hold a grudge against me for it, maybe you just find my writing style irritating, or perhaps I’m just an incorrigible bastard and all the other film writers I follow have been extremely patient with me all the years I’ve come to their sites.
Whatever it is, I’d love to know and square it with you, because I really don’t like feuds or having “enemies.” I think In Contention is a great site and you do a damn good job of running it. But you are *so* frustrating to deal with sometimes. I’m re-reading my initial sentence that infuriated you so much and I still can’t figure out what you found so offensive about it, especially relative to the barbs you threw at everyone else before I jumped in.
Whatever…tomorrow is a new day, hugs and kisses for Steinfeld and the other nominees.
114 1-27-2011 at 4:16 am
Glenn said...
Most of the criticisms for Weaver’s work seems to revolve around her not expanding much on what was already written, but – despite that being a glowing endorsement of the screenplay – I don’t think that’s right. Listen to the way her voice ducks and weaves, plays cat and mouse with the actor opposite her during the “you’ve done some bad things Sweetie” scene. The way she hides her words behind her innocent face, and then as it cracks when she’s around her boys. The temptation to go big and hysterical was always there once the twist (if you wanna call it that, but it’s more just a very interesting plot turn) occurs, but she never does.
I definitely think she should win and, hey, maybe – as Guy pointed out in the podcast – she can pull a Marcia Gay Harden and win the thing!
As for “The Fighter” ladies, I much preferred Amy Adams actually, which surprises me since I usually dive headfirst into the love when it comes to a big performance like Leo’s. Alas, Leo’s characterisation (even if she is real) is what put me off that film. Asking us to laugh and mock these poor white trash folk and then flipping and wanting us to cheer them on? I didn’t get that. Adams, however, was right on target all the way. I do reckon if the British block will be a big hindrance to Leo’s win. Could it?
Steinfeld? Didn’t deserve a nomination in any category, really, and Bonham Carter… well, she did what she could.
115 1-27-2011 at 4:59 am
JJ1 said...
Yeah, back to the actual performances …
Glenn, I appreciate what you said about Weaver. I’m one of those who found little in her performance that raised the level from the screenplay. But your argument is well noted.
I still think Adams and HBC gave the best “supporting” performance of the nominees.
And Steinfeld, as Mike M. mentioned above –
“She competently handled challenging dialogue, and surprised a lot of people because she’s so young. A lot of the times, she sounds like she monologue-ing instead of verbalizing thought.”
I would agree (for the most part). She was 13, fresh-faced, handled the dialogue with aplomb and intent. But I wouldn’t have her in my Top 5 of either category. I still wish her the best. She’s adorable, and obviously talented.
116 1-27-2011 at 6:26 am
Andrej said...
“Last year I went in order of their presentation the year prior. This year, same thing. Order of their presentation at last year’s Oscars.”
Didn’t they start last year with Best Actor in a Supporting Role with Christoph Waltz winning? :s
Oh well, small details.
117 1-27-2011 at 6:37 am
Sawyer said...
Agree with Ryan in 102. Steinfeld’s work was good, but not awards-worthy. I wouldn’t say it was any better than Blake Lively in The Town, or Wasikowska in TKAAR. Good work by young actresses in high-profile films, but shouldn’t have been good enough for Oscar.
118 1-27-2011 at 8:33 am
Joe7827 said...
Kris: may I suggest a nap? Your arguments aren’t making much sense anymore (pointing to Screenplay as an example of category placements that can be legitimately proven, then using a screenplay as an example of a subjective category placement), and you kind of flew off the rails with the Sacheen Littlefeather reference.
By the way: nobody cares what I think, but I’m not getting involved because I actually don’t think Steinfeld should win anyway. (Amy Adams is just so darn charming.)
May I also point out: this discussion has taken a very sour turn considering Kris’ incisive, even-handed writeup that was such a pleasure to read. I truly look forward to the future installments, especially his certain-to-be-giddy comments on the documentary field.
119 1-27-2011 at 8:43 am
mark said...
i find supp actress underwhemlming.
esp helena bonham carter and hailee steinfeld
amy adams is fine but i think the praise is due to the fact it is a different sort of turn by here not that she is flat out amazing,solid yeah esp in her scenes near the end of the film
weaver would be my choice.
leo is good but i expected more heart.
it would’ve been more underwhelming with kunis or hershey in there.
i tthink a lot of the best supporting actress performances have been forgotten
dale dickey,lesley manville,mia wasikowska,anne marie duff,blake lively,kirsten dunst,kristin scott thomas & marisa berenson.
120 1-27-2011 at 9:21 am
Kristopher Tapley said...
Andre: Yeah, I screwed up. Thought it was supporting actress. I’ll just flip the two.
Joe: My point was lost in there somewhere. Trying to bridge things. I’ll cop to being more than a little cranky lately, though.
121 1-27-2011 at 9:52 am
Maxim said...
I think Seinfeld gave the best female performance of the year, period.
122 1-27-2011 at 5:08 pm
AN said...
@Robert Hamer:
Stop putting words in my mouth please, & use common sense.
Where did I say it was OKAY for the Academy to keep playing games w/the kids placement?
I just said I’m not up for continually whining over it like some people choose to (hint,hint).
You think just because a few *civilians* cry foul over this *tradition* that’s been a part of history time after time, they’re going to change? Hah. Think again.
How about stop CRYING over spilled milk & get the heck over it. It’s pointless just like your *argument*.
123 1-27-2011 at 5:21 pm
AN said...
@Maxim:
Agree to an extent. Steinfeld is in my Top 5 female performances of the year.
Sorry Mike M, I disagree about Hailee’s performance. I thought she handled the dialogue perfectly, & it didn’t sound to me like she was in a”monologue” of any sort. I thought she came across as poised & smart.
To each his own, I guess.
124 1-27-2011 at 6:41 pm
Patryk said...
I remember Siskel and Ebert disagreeing on the placement of Geena Davis in Supporting Actress in 1988. Siskel felt Davis should not have been voted for because in his view it was category fraud, but Ebert disagreed. Sometimes the actor comes up short because of the split (I think that is why Glenn Close didn’t get nominated for “Reversal of Fortune” in either category).
125 1-27-2011 at 7:20 pm
JJ1 said...
This may be tangential, though, it may apply, here …. but what was up with Naomi Watts’ omission in the 2001 season?
Was it that there was little buzz? Or was there some ridiculous Supp. Actress horseshit campaign? How could there be one for Supporting? The movie was all her; with Laura Herring being a strong support.
126 1-28-2011 at 12:28 pm
Simon Warrasch said...
Will win: Amy Adams
Could win: Mellisa Leo, Helena Bonham Carter, Jackie Weaver, Haille Steinfeld
Should win: Amy Adams
Should have been here: Mila Kunis – Black Swan
Why should and will Amy Adams win?
1. She is one of the best working Actress today
2. She gave us brilliant performances in Indi Movies like Junebug, in Dramas like Doubt in Comedies like Enchanted ….
3. Since 2006 she was nominated (inclusive The Fighter):
3 Oscar Nominations
2 Bafta Nominations
6 Critics Choice Nominations (1 Win)
3 Golden Globe Nominations
1 Indipendent Spirit Award Nominations (1 Win)
3 Golden Sattelite Nominations
5 Sag Nominations
3. She is far better than Mellisa Leo in The Fighter and she deserves it at most! She should win because she is such a hard working actress and simply the best! Thank you Amy Adams!
127 2-10-2011 at 8:00 am
JJ1 said...
The more I think of it, the mosre I think this category is a MESS, and have no clue who will win.
Melissa Leo, the leader, losing votes along the way.
Amy Adams, hard to peak her nose through, but probably gaining. A lot of people think she’s better than the presumed leader.
Helena Bonham Carter, winning people over with her wit/humor, possible career win, King’s Speech momentum.
Hailee Steinfeld, a big spoiler, but I’m not feeling it lately. That could change again.
Jackie Weaver, I think in 5th, but you nevvvvvver know. She’s a doll.
I just have no idea, lately.
128 2-23-2011 at 1:36 am
Aaron said...
I agree that Helena Bonham Carter is a very likely choice, given her recent BAFTA win and the outstanding momentum of The King’s Speech, not to mention the fact that she has a sharp and witty sense of humor and also seems extremely humble and approachable…
…but I just don’t see it as an “Oscar” performance. I know that’s vague, but the performance is so subtle and she doesn’t really have a distinguishable character arc like the other five actresses….
…it’s a really tough call. I could feasibly see any of the five ladies (including Jacki Weaver) take it. I’m starting to wonder if the Melissa Leo ad-hoopla actually, truthfully pissed off a lot of people in the Academy, or maybe they really didn’t care and/or voted for her anyway…
129 2-24-2011 at 5:40 pm
Daniel said...
Someone changed their mind!