The LAMB Devours the Oscars - Best Actress
Editor’s note: Welcome to the seventh of a 33-part series dissecting the 83rd Academy Awards, brought to you by the Large Association of Movie Blogs and its assorted members. Every day leading up to the Oscars, a new post written by a different LAMB will be published, each covering a different category of the Oscars. To read any other posts regarding this event, please click the tag following the post. Thank you, and enjoy!
by Andrew at Encore’s World of Film & TV
If you were online on Tuesday morning you might have experienced some crashing of servers or slight hiccups with page loading. That was probably evidence of the zillion cinephiles worldwide logging on to see what the latest nominations for the Academy Awards were. It’s weird, we cinephiles have this symbiotic love/hate relationship with the Oscars. We’re always quick to condemn their humdrum choices, but we spend months waiting to see what the choices will be. The wonders of cinema, eh? The Best Actress race is always an interesting one to watch – if you’re a cinephile, chances are you like your actresses and there’s always much to discuss with the nominees AMPAS picks.
This year we get this five: a lesbian mother dealing with the sperm donor who may be taking over her family’s life, a grieving mother who copes my lashing out at everyone around her, a teenage girl looking to save her home and her family, a ballerina devoted to her trade and a woman in a marriage where she feels trapped – without knowing why.
Pundits would have you think that like the Actor and Supporting Actor race this one is all locked up – but I’ve always been a conscientious dissenter, let’s examine the field.
Annette Bening in The Kids Are All Right as Nic
previous nods: Supporting Actress nomination for The Grifters (1990), Actress Nomination for American Beauty (1999), Actress Nomination for Being Julia (2004)
notable un-nominated roles: Bugsy (1991), The American President (1995), Running With Scissors (2006)
Pros: It’s arguable, everything is, but I’d say that Annette Bening is easily one of the most overdue actors over forty. Now, depending on who you are the idea of someone acquiring an Oscar for being due is loathsome, but if you trace back each Actress win of the decade (except for Theron, Swan and Berry) they were each awarded – in addition to the good performances – on some level, for having had stellar careers. Of the five nominees Bening qualifies most easily as Hollywood royalty. She’s been in the business longest, she’s married to Oscar winner Warren Beatty and she’s probably worked with the most members. She’s also incredibly charming, philanthropic and easygoing – which can never hurt in a campaign. Who’s Voting For Her (and Who’s Not): Well, you can only except Warren to cast his vote in her direction – though there’s a lesser chance that all the women he’s ever been affiliated won’t (and that’s a sizeable chunk). Jeremy Irons, Michael Gambon, Michael Douglas, Kevin Spacey and Kerry Washington might probably be throwing their voters towards her, and probably Julianne Moore too. I’d wager that she’s probably not getting Hilary Swank’s vote…
Cons: Let’s face it, Annette is old – by the Academy’s standards and this category is not receptive to older women. Julia vs Ellen; Halle vs Sissy and Judi; Charlize vs Diane; Hilary vs Annette; Reese vs Felicity; Marion vs Julie; Sandra vs Meryl. True, in half of these cases I think the right decision was made it’s a bit difficult to ignore what seems to be an overwhelming trend in favour of youth. Annette’s also suffering from the fact that her film is a) a comedy and b) an ensemble flick. One thing The Kids Are All Right does, which I love it for, is that it doesn’t set anyone up to be the hero and there’s often so much chatter about what constitutes a “true” lead. Annette and Julianne lead in accordance with each other and if lazy voters look for an easy choice for a true lead, it won’t be her.
The Performance (my thoughts): It’s a bit too easy to look at the pragmatic Nic and lump her with all the other strong women that Annette has played, it’s a disservice to her talent and to sensible female characters everywhere – all strong women are not synonymous in their strength. Choledenko’s film depends a great deal on the chemistry of the main quintet and Annette, like her co-stars, is very comfortable in the role. Her rapport with Julianne Moore stands out especially and it’s her ability to play realistic without being harsh that is her calling card here. Nic never becomes the stereotype that she could, which has to do with the writing but even more with Annette’s sensitive interpretation.
Nicole Kidman in Rabbit Hole as Becca
previous nods: Actress nomination for Moulin Rouge (2001), Actress win for The Hours (2002)
notable un-nominated roles: To Die For (1995), Cold Mountain (2003), Birth (2004), Margot at the Wedding (2007)
Pros: Angels are singing (maybe it’s just in my head) because Nicole has finally made her way back to the Kodak theatre. This is Nicole’s first nominations since her Oscar win, even though she’s been doing fine work in between and maybe the voters want to show her just how much they miss her. Her role of a grieving mother, though not precisely sympathetic, might appeal to women voters.Who’s Voting for Her (and Who’s Not): Marion Cotillard was recently singing praises for this performance, and she only recently starred opposite Nicole on Nine so maybe the entire Oscar winning ensemble is going to throw in their votes towards Nicole. There’s the possibility of her getting the Australian block, and I want to guess that Sean Penn and George Clooney are behind her, too.
Cons: As sympathetic as Becca could be, she’s something of a bitch at times and one wonders if that abrasiveness could turn off voters. Then there’s also the fact that Nicole (unlike her competition) has been fêted by the Academy before. She’s happily married, just got another child and seems generally perfect – does she really need more? Add that to the fact that Rabbit Hole has ended up being one of the most woefully ignored smaller films of 2010 picking up no traction for ANYTHING other than Nicole’s performance, she probably doesn’t have that much of a chance.
The Performance (my thoughts): Nicole assumes the role of Becca with aplomb and she loses herself in the role so much it’s difficult to imagine anyone else playing it. It’s something generic and clichéd (even if it’s true) to play the grieving mother as a shell of herself. Becca is different, angry with the world – harsh, even when she doesn’t realise it and Nicole ensures that the audience understands her behaviour, and sympathises despite the overt prickliness of it all. I still consider her to be one of the strongest actors of her generation, and this type of atypical role only solidifies that prognosis. Jennifer Lawrence in Winter’s Bone as Ree
previous nominations/notable roles: N/A
Pros: None of the five women have as sympathetic an arc as Ree does in Winter’s Bone and the fact that the character she plays is on that tenuous precipice between childhood and womanhood makes her even more sympathetic. Winter’s Bone surprised a few with its four nominations which shows that there’s goodwill behind the film. Moreover, she’s also the only nominee playing the obvious “deglam” card, and there’s a vague physicality to the role which could impress voters.Who’s Voting for Her (and Who’s Not): This is a tough one to vote, but I want to say Melissa Leo for the Frozen River parallels, and I’d wager Hilary Swank too who could sympathise (if not empathise) with the girl-in-a-small town equivalents. She suffers from being so close to Portman that they could be appealing to the same voting demographic.
Cons: She’s a very fresh face, and though Oscar likes its women young they don’t like them this young. She’s also facing competition from four women with way longer careers, three of them without a statue so as impressive a performance as it may be, she won’t be the first choice, and probably not even the alternate.
The Performance (my thoughts): I know more than a few were impressed with Hawkes and Dickey, but for me Lawrence carries Winter’s Bone on her young shoulders. It’s been compared to Frozen River in its minimalist approach (though, I think it’s superior) but like Leo Lawrence must ensure that the film never eludes the audience. The role is a physical one, and it’s also one that depends on showy scenes as well as quieter introspective ones. She doesn’t exactly play through a gamut of emotions, but her character’s development is palpable.Natalie Portman in Black Swan as Nina Sayers
previous nod: Supporting Actress nomination for Closer (2004)
notable un-nominated roles: Leon (1994); Brothers (2009)
Pros: Momentum, thy name is Natalie Portman. Sometimes, it all comes down to timing and Black Swan’s impetus into the cinematic world has set Natalie Portman up as the one to beat. Like Lawrence, she’s carrying the film on shoulders and if persons begin looking for the actress who’s “leading” the most – she’s the obvious candidate. She’s around the right age, a previous nominee but still young enough to evoke that youthful cadence but in the business long enough so that her growth had been palpable. And who knows how many actors will relate to Nina’s dedication to her trade. Then there’s the fact that the role is such a physical one, and sometimes voters are attracted to the obvious tricks of the trade. Who’s Voting for Her: Everyone in Black Swan, and knowing how much Julia Roberts loves her costars (read: Javier Bardem) she might be too, in fact throw in the entire cast of Closer and Mike Nichols for good measure (unless Jude goes for Nicole). Tobey MaGuire is probably voting for her, too.
Cons: Where there is momentum, there will soon be backlash… The thing about trends is that they always end up being broken, and if voters tire of incessantly rewarding the PYT – the more sedate, and mature Annette stands to benefit from any lack of love for Portman here. It’s a specific type of performance that depends on playing in a particular register, and discerning voters might not be impressed by the insular nature of it all. She’s arguably the least
The Performance (my thoughts): The biggest compliment I can give Natalie is that the role fits her like a glove. The issues that Nina faces are the same drawbacks of Natalie’s own skill as an actor. She’s able to approach Nina with this intensity which can seem narrow-minded but is necessary for the film. Despite qualms about Natalie as an actress she’s always notable for her ability to surrender to a performance, and though this not my favourite work of hers that sort of passion is crucial for the performance and for the film. She succeeds, brilliantly, in ensuring that all the technical aspects and performances around her don’t shroud Aronofsky’s singular arc.
Michelle Williams in Blue Valentine as Cindy
previous nods: Supporting Actress nomination for Brokeback Mountain
notable un-nominated roles: Wendy & Lucy (2008)
Pros: Although I’m not a fan of Williams in Brokeback Mountain, there are more than a few who’d profess that Rachel Weisz robbed her of an Oscar back in 2005. There’s nothing like a recent snub to encourage goodwill for an Oscar and if we want to get snarky we could always suggest that her nudity puts her in good stead for an Oscar (see Hana, Viola, Leticia, Ada). This is one of those special roles that doesn’t depend on an overt amount of physicality, but demands an emotional potency from the actor – which Williams delivers on.Who’s Voting for Her (and Who’s Not): Alec Baldwin, apparently: he effusively praised the performance at the Golden Globes. Ryan Gosling and Ang Lee would probably be in her corner (and possibly Jake Gyllenhaal). Weinstein is obviously giving his vote her; but, let’s face it, she’s not getting Tom Cruise’s vote.
Cons: Even though this IS a Weinstein flick Blue Valentine hasn’t gotten nearly as publicity as it could have benefited from and there’s no telling how the sparring with the MPAA might swayed opinion on the actual film. This is the type of performance that’s patently part of a duo (with Gosling) and there’s no telling if there could be some ill will that she ends up with the nomination alone (although, it conversely turns into a pro if all the fans of the film decide to back her).
The Performance (my thoughts): The role is not a simple one, and she’s forced to play a woman dissatisfied with a marriage even if she has no precise reason to be, on the surface it’s evocative of her work in Brokeback Mountain but it’s significantly better. Williams is able to establish that ennui of marriage and even if you can’t understand her plight, it’s difficult to fault her for her feelings. And, she’s just as satisfying in the flashback portions establishing those same personal traits in Cindy that eventual go sour when they stagnate. Gun to my head I’d rank them Annette, Nicole, Michelle, Jennifer, Natalie – although it could just as easily be Nicole, Annette, Michelle, Natalie, Jennifer.
PREDICTION: Something tells me that the race is not as wrapped up as it seems, and though everyone knows it’s down to Natalie and Annette I wouldn’t be terribly surprised if Old Hollywood trumps New Hollywood. I suppose I should wait for the results of the SAG to decide, but for now I’ll ignore that gut feeling and predict Natalie for the win (though, I’m crossing my fingers for a Bening surprise.)
The fact that my least favourite performance of the lot could go on to win doesn’t disappoint me terribly considering that this lineup rivals 2000, 2003 and 2006 in terms of uniformity of good performances. Yes, it’s a shame that less buzzed about performances like Halle Berry in Frankie & Alice or Patricia Clarkson in Cairo Time didn’t get a chance to jump in or deserving also-rans like Julianne Moore couldn’t come to fruition, but I can honestly I’m generally content with this list.
What do you think of the Actress race this year?
