There are so many things wrong with this Digital Spy piece about the Best Actress race, it’s difficult to know where to begin. Article writer Marcell Minaya seems to have filched gossip columnist Roger Friedman’s recent (largely baseless) statement that the category is bereft of contenders, and disguised it as Academy insider talk:
The Oscars executives have allegedly been struggling to form a list of best actress nominees.
An Oscar insider said: “It’s only just dawning that there’s a distinct lack of potentials in the best actress category. It’s been a pretty lacklustre year for movies in general but it seems that no one wrote any decent lead roles for women … There are many to choose from when it comes to supporting actresses but very few in the lead.”
For starters, pray tell, who are these “Oscars executives” who “form lists” of nominees in August? I was always under the impression that nominee lists are formed when the entire Academy membership casts their votes in January, but clearly I’ve been misinformed. Apparently, these shadowy executives who list the nominees as they appear also feel comfortable judging the field before the bulk of the contenders have been released, or even seen. Tough break.
The silliness continues as the article’s “insider” makes his one valid point (that Meryl Streep is very well-positioned to win her third Oscar come March), and then scuppers it with this gem:
“It looks like Meryl Streep may do it again as she has played the lead to acclaim in two films out this year.”
Other actresses that have been suggested for contention on the 2010 Oscar ballot are Hilary Swank for Amelia, Emily Blunt for The Young Victoria and Penelope Cruz for Broken Embraces.
Wait, she’s played the lead to acclaim in two films already? Did I miss the moment when people saw and raved about her performance in “It’s Complicated?” Well, shoot. Must’ve been the same moment when co-frontrunner Carey Mulligan’s campaign was inexplicably torpedoed, since I see no mention of her in this article.
Research. It costs so little, and yet …
Comments
43 responses to “Get a clue”
Kris, do you believe that the Julia buzz can last untill January?
I wrote the article, not Kris, but I think I speak for both of us when I say: yes.
I hope Michelle still stands a chance.
I am a little sad about some films being pushed to 2010.
And the sad thing to me about the best actress race is that by early January, there seems like the race is pretty much decided — even now, there are certain actresses who seem like almost-locks for a nod.
Where’s the fun in that?
Here’s to hoping for some surprise film to surprise us and push it’s way in the race in categories like lead actress.
Guy, I liked J&J and loved Streep’s performance but you really think she’s gonna win a Best Actress Oscar? Seems like she’d have supporting in the bag. She’s well-positioned to win, sure, but there’s no way I watched her Child and thought damn… that’s Best Actress right there. NO WAY.
It’s obviously worth a nom, but after waiting 27 years and 11 nominations, it feels pretty lightweight.
InSneider: No, I’m not saying I think she’ll win, necessarily. If you put a gun to my head and asked me at this too-early stage, I’d put my money on Carey Mulligan.
But a nomination looks like a good bet. (Still considering the possibility of it being for “It’s Complicated,” though. Again, too early.)
Guy, I get your point completely, but seriously drop the snootiness. It’s getting annoying and it’s completely unnecessary. I really like this site, but your arrogance is getting on my nerves.
Duly and sincerely noted, Anonymous. Have never thought of my writing as “arrogant” per se, but I will try to keep the tone that is bothering you in check.
It’s nicer to take feedback from a named source, though. Know what I mean?
Huh? What exactly did Guy write in this thread that seemed “snooty?” And this is coming from someone who isn’t afraid of criticizing the staff.
I think the talk about how long it’s been since Streep won has got a lot of momentum. She probably would have won last year if Winslet wasn’t so overdue. If we don’t see a powerhouse, once in a decade, performance to come out, Streep should win this year.
The academy also LOVES to give actors an award for playing a real life person. It’s a gimick that never gets old to the academy. Playing a famous person with an aura already around that person, makes the performance seem so much bigger and important than it actually is. This is a mistake when judging acting. Someone shouldn’t get extras credit because of WHO they are playing.
I would predict Streep to win at this early stage. She has all the momentum going into Oscar season and is well past due for the gold as we all know. My money goes with Streep. Guy is not exactly a Streep fan as his writing well shows…
“Guy is not exactly a Streep fan as his writing well shows…”
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I think Streep is one of the best actors we’ve ever had. I don’t worship her as indiscriminately as some do, and I think she’s made missteps (as have most great actors), but her brilliance is not in doubt. You’ve misunderstood my criticisms.
I am hoping the other Julia, Tilda Swinton, is remembered at Oscar time. Her performance in “Julia” is as good as or ever better than the one she gave in “The Deep End.” Now that would be a shocker, but entirely deserving.
Can’t disagree there. Amazing work.
I would think the Academy might like to do a sort of reversal of fortune. Swinton wins for “Julia” and gives back the award she won for “Michael Collins,” (which I still believe should have gone to Amy Ryan in “Gone Baby Gone…) Hopefully Swinton will get some critics or guild attention and more people check out her performance on DVD.
I fear “Julia” is the kind of vehicle that would benefit more from European/British awards notice — a chance that has, unfortunately, now passed given that it was a 2008 release.
Guy, you claim to be neutral/pro on Meryl Streep and her work but I don’t believe I read one positive narrative you’ve written on her behalf. Can you name me one? If you can, I’ll bet it is mostly negative with a hint of something positive…You have to admit that Streep is absoulutely a threat to win the Oscar in January 2010. Right?
Well, of course she is — though that has nothing to do with my own personal opinion.
Admittedly, I haven’t had a chance to write extensively about Streep’s virtues since I joined the site because I disliked the work she did last year, and we tend to discuss the work at hand here. I don’t do many retrospective pieces like John.
To be honest, I thought my piece on Friday made my appreciation of many of her performances (if not always her films) quite clear. Sorry if this sounds overly defensive, but I don’t like having words put in my mouth … with the utmost respect, I know what I think better than you do.
“Michael Collins”? Don’t you mean Michael Clayton? And Swinton deserved that one. It may not be as showy as Ryan in Gone Baby Gone, but anyone who can take the stock “corporate bitch” role and make it as compelling as she did deserves the award.
Robert….yes, of course I meant Clayton and not Collins…just overeager typing fingers. I agree that her performance in Clayton was compelling, but I still think Ryan deserved it. But check her out in “Julia” if you haven’t already. I think it was released here in 2009 making it eligible this year.
I loved Streep’s performance, but normally I’d expect it to get buried and forgotten by nominations because it’s in a summer comedy. Thankfully, Meryl Streep has her own front row parking spot at the Kodak Theater. Everyone should be judged on their merits. But if her reputation gets her a little extra consideration here, at least the right performance will end up on the ballot.
What I’m wondering is whether Streep will benefit from the Dark Knight/WALL-E backlash. Will voters be tempted to prove their open mindedness and relevance by giving the award to a comedic performance this year? And can Streep’s traditional Oscar resume make some of the old guard feel comfortable voting for her comedy in a way they wouldn’t feel comfortable voting for a pure comedian?
This article is completely rot and I’ve seen people going around quoting it as proof that Meryl Streep will win the Oscar next year… what nonsense.
Guy has given 4 Oscars to Meryl (I mean that he chose her among her fellow nominees four times).
He just doesn’t love Meryl post 1990. I’m not with him on that but what I’m trying to say is that he obviously respects her a lot. It took me a while to see it because it happened that I read only criticism by him but it was just the timing.
Any way, I have a problem. (I hope I always have only problems like this) I want Meryl to win her third but I also want justice and in case Mulligan (or anyone) gives a better performance I want her to get the award. I can’t decide what is my priority. :p
I guess if Meryl’s perf is one of the year’s top 3, I want her to win. Mulligan will probably win someday anyway.
Vincere got picked up by IFC this week. I am just going to keep mentioning Giovanna Mezzogiorno’s name until I (hopefully) get some support via the Toronto screenings.
Also: The arbitrary criticisms being thrown around about Guy’s work are ridiculous. Guy, I am definitely with you on her nomination possibly coming from “It’s Complicated.” While the completely generic title (comparable only to “Love Happens”) has muted my enthusiasm, she has a great part based on the script. Very funny, sexy, and a showcase for her accessible comedic side.
Streep is not winning. Not this time. I think it’s the turn for a new, young actress to take the lead in Hollywood.
Could you explain the thinking behind It’s Complicated, Guy? I’m not saying you’re wrong. But Meryl’s lucky she’s got such a great script in J&J, and such great actors to play off of. It’s Complicated looks like a good opportunity for her but having seen the preview I can’t imagine it would be AS good a showcase. I’d hope that if anything It’s Complicated weighed favorably in her chances with J&J. But your feeling is It’s Complicated would more likely be the film?
Henry: I’m not saying I think “It’s Complicated” is a MORE likely nomination vehicle … until anyone lays eyes on the film that’s impossible to say. But I will explain why I think it’s a possibility:
The combination of Meyers and Streep should make for a big hit with the over-40s, the same demographic that served “Something’s Gotta Give” so well — and, coincidentally enough, the same demographic that dominates the Academy. That would make Streep the star of two older-skewing hit comedies in one year, which is bound to be a story — but being a December release, “It’s Complicated” will be the title leading that story, and possibly be the one fresher in voters’ minds.
Meanwhile, as Rosengje has pointed out, the film gives her a chance to play a sexy rom-com lead — the kind of role actresses over 50 hardly ever get — and I think her peers might like to celebrate that kind of age-defying spirit. (It’s the same kind of thinking that spurred Diane Keaton’s campaign six years ago.)
Admittedly, “Julie & Julia” has the advantage of the biopic element, and might well turn out to be a far superior performance, in which case “It’s Complicated” will simply be added fuel to THAT campaign. But if the reviews for her work in the latter are similarly glowing, and the film takes off, I just think the Academy’s notoriously short memories might favour the year-end release.
It’s an unusual (and interesting) situation, having two comedies in play.
Guy: I love you comment “missteps along the way” regarding actors — seriously — those missteps are what allow actors to evolve because we always learn more from failure you know — all the greats have misstepped, (or have they?) and once they grow from it they come back better than ever…
for me if you are nominated , it´s a triumph.
go on Penelope, go on
I think she will win, because of three reasons: 1. She was last year’s frontrunner [with Winslet] 2. She’s playing a real life person. 3. She’s deserved it in numerous years and has been snubbed because there’s always the “overdue” one.
Plus, It’s Complicated will boost her possibilities, thanks to its late release. I don’t think the academy will go for a newcomer or an unknown actress. Don’t think Swank will win a third, when most people seem so upset about her second win. Not to mention that she gets nominated only for playing masculine roles [Boys Don’t Cry, Million Dollar Baby and Amelia, if she gets one]
Cornish, Mulligan and Ronan won’t win next year, I am telling you. If they were running for Best Supporting Actress it’s a different story because Oscar voters tend to be more risky in the supporting categories. Penelope Cruz won’t be nominated and Emily Blunt, hopefully will get one for The Young Victoria.
I will be more than happy to see Streep winning a third. The other two happened when I was too young.
Oh and forgot to say that this year Streep has been unanimously praised for her performance. Last year’s Doubt didn’t get so much praise and yet she won the SAG.
Regarding the article, I think most people forget that there’s a board that chooses who could be nominated first, and then that list goes to the voters who choose 5 of the previuosly selected “pre-nominees”.
maybe the error in the piece you quoted is not exactly an error —meryl steeep is lead in two films this year, one in release the other in the can and out by december 25.
i don’t see how you can criticize this article and yet looking on the right side of this page, you already have a complete list of oscar nominees in major categories for films that basically nobody has seen. you posted this list even when some of these films were still in production.
you can prognosticate and nobody else can? advanced pr or fraud?
Meryl Streep will emerge as a front-runner this year. Coming from her formidable performance from Doubt last year, then a solid J & J, then a poignant, It’s Complicated. She is a sure winner already! What does she need to do to win that Oscar? Eat fire or do a trapeze stunt? What? Geesh, you critics are mean! If you can give Kate Winslet with her so, so, supporting acting the Oscar Best Actress for The Reader last year, the more you should give it to Meryl this year! Have a heart people! Meryl will not stop til she gets her third!
Was there ever a time people just voted for these awards based purely on performance rather than age (ingenuees getting shafted for legends) or money (Weinstein Brothers)?
With all the behind the scenes bullshit that is Academy Award season, how can any take these award seriously?
As an aspiring writer, if I can honestly say that if nominated, I would just be happy to get dressed up and get free food and booze. Win or lose.
Alluhrey: I think you’ve missed my point. The article claims that both Streep’s performances have already been acclaimed, which is blatantly untrue since one of them hasn’t even been seen yet.
“Geesh, you critics are mean! If you can give Kate Winslet with her so, so, supporting acting the Oscar Best Actress for The Reader last year, the more you should give it to Meryl this year!”
You are aware that critics don’t give out the Oscars, right?
Take a deep breath and relax, everyone.
I think there are referring to DOUBT and J&J with regard to the two acclaimed performances this year even though DOUBT was 2008.
I think there will be lots of talk regarding other actresses between now and January, but if the critics’ groups start giving their award to Streep, it’s over and she will claim the Oscar. She has received some of the best reviews of her career for “Julia and Julia.” Coming after “Prada” and “Doubt,” giving the award to a newcomer or previous winner would just be tacky.
“Was there ever a time people just voted for these awards based purely on performance rather than age (ingenuees getting shafted for legends) or money (Weinstein Brothers)?”
Snowballa, no, there wasn’t. There was plenty of wining and dining at Pickfair that got Mary Pickford her Oscar way back in the second year of the Oscars. It’s actually probably less egregious now. Not that I’m an Oscar history expert–I just play one on the internet. ;)
@guylodge, have you seen “an education”? because you have hailed carey mulligan as a frontrunner in a film that showed only where?
I have seen it, yes — though I base any frontrunner claims less on my own viewing of the film than on the buzz that’s been steadily growing since Sundance. What’s your point?