Showing posts with label Michelle Williams. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michelle Williams. Show all posts

Saturday, March 11, 2023

Countdown to the Oscars: Best Actress


We’re counting down the days until the Academy Awards! We’ll be here, breaking down each of the 23 categories, talking a bit of history, and trying to figure out who is going to win all those gold statues. So check back throughout the next three weeks for Last Cinema Standing’s Countdown to the Oscars.


Best Actress


The nominees are:


Cate Blanchett in TÁR

Ana de Armas in Blonde

Andrea Riseborough in To Leslie

Michelle Williams in The Fabelmans

Michelle Yeoh in Everything Everywhere All at Once


I have been covering the Oscar race in one capacity or another for 14 years now. In that time, there has never been an acting race this strange or this close. There have been surprises, certainly. Olivia Colman’s 2018 Best Actress win springs to mind immediately. Maybe Best Supporting Actress in 2013 felt this close, with Jennifer Lawrence and Lupita Nyong’o going down to the wire. But, this is infinitely closer and, again, stranger than that.


It started at the nomination stage with Andrea Riseborough’s moderately surprising nomination. She was, after all, nominated at the Independent Spirit Awards. But, the film world blew up and pretended like the nomination had manifested from nothing. Collusion and improper campaigning accusations were thrown around, and the Academy was essentially forced to investigate. They found nothing because there was nothing. 


It’s a good performance by a popular actor in an independent movie. Her team’s grassroots campaign had a helluva lot more integrity than most studio campaigns, for which millions of dollars are thrown around in hopes of getting this kind of recognition. That ultimately was what it was all about. The wealthy studios, who got so used to working this system to their advantage, got outplayed and they didn’t like it. It was a manufactured controversy from the word go.


The part of it that was not manufactured and had nothing to do with campaign procedures was the perception that Riseborough’s nomination specifically came at the expense of either Daneille Deadwyler or Viola Davis, two performers of color who gave brilliant performances in critically acclaimed films. Again, not Riseborough’s fault, but it served as further proof that we are hardly out of the #OscarsSoWhite days. Truly, if you saw Deadwyler’s performance in Till, there’s virtually no way to leave her off your top five. My guess, the still heavily white Academy didn’t watch it.


Once we got through all of that hullabaloo, Cate Blanchett continued to pick up every award under the sun for one of the great performances of the 21st century. When she picked up the BAFTA, her victory seemed all but assured. Truly, if Renee Zelwegger in Judy was undeniable, there was nothing going to stand in the way of this coronation.


Then, Everything Everywhere All at Once began to steamroll everything. It was already strong as the leading nominee at the Academy Awards. It won the DGA and PGA, all but cementing its status as the one to beat for Best Picture. When the Screen Actors Guild Awards arrived, the film was a freight train barrelling downhill. It won the most SAG Awards ever, including ensemble and leading actress for Michelle Yeoh. 


It felt like something had shifted. All of a sudden, Everything Everywhere All at Once wasn’t going to be just another Best Picture winner. It started down a path of historic victory, which is where we are now. And, due to a quirk of the schedule, it picked up all this momentum just before ballots were in hand. In a lot of years, the votes would already have been cast before the SAG Awards, but not so this year. This year, voters watched one movie win every award under the sun, then received their ballots. The face of that movie: Yeoh. So, how could the momentum not sweep her up, as well?


I could go through all the stats. In the face of all of this, they’re not particularly convincing. We’ll throw out the Golden Globes because they’re wonky and strange and not representative of much of anything. Let’s look at SAG and BAFTA, our favorites. We’ll use 2007 as the cutoff point because that was the year BAFTA really announced itself as the place to look for surprises. 


If you have forgotten, 2007 was the year Best Actress was supposed to go to Julie Christie for Away from Her and Supporting Actress was a race between Ruby Dee in American Gangster and Amy Ryan in Gone Baby Gone. Christie and Dee won their respective SAG categories and were favored at the Oscars. The BAFTAs went to Marion Cotillard for La Vie en Rose and Tilda Swinton for Michael Clayton, in actress and supporting actress, respectively. Cotillard and Swinton, of course, went on to win the Oscars.


The next year, SAG went with Meryl Streep in Doubt for actress, while the BAFTA went to Kate Winslet in The Reader. Winslet won the Oscar. In 2009, SAG got it right with Sandra Bullock for The Blind Side, while the BAFTA went to Carey Mulligan for An Education. All three matched in 2010 on Natalie Portman in Black Swan. The next year, Viola Davis won the SAG for The Help and Streep won the BAFTA for The Iron Lady. Streep won the Oscar. It flipped again in 2012, when Emmanuelle Riva won the BAFTA for Amour and Jennifer Lawrence won SAG and the Oscar for Silver Linings Playbook.


The next five years in a row, they all matched. Then came the Colman-Glenn Close race, when the world expected Close finally to win a long-overdue Academy Award for The Wife. Instead, Colman, BAFTA in hand, shocked the world. They matched on Zelwegger in 2019. Then in 2020, SAG went with Davis again, this time for Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom. BAFTA and the Academy went with Frances McDormand in Nomadland. Last year, SAG picked the winner with Jessica Chastain in The Eyes of Tammy Faye, but that film had not been released yet in England and was not eligible for the BAFTA.


It should be noted that no actress this century has won the Academy Award for Best Actress without winning at least one or the other of the SAG award or BAFTA. So, we can pretty safely discount Riseborough, Ana de Armas, and Michelle Williams, but we already knew that. If we’re reading all the stats correctly, Blanchett has the numbers on her side. But as the poet said, you don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.


Michelle Yeoh in Everything Everywhere All at Once – Yeoh is a legend. There are no two ways about it, and her resumé speaks for itself. Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon. Memoirs of a Geisha. Crazy Rich Asians. She’s already in the Mummy franchise, the Kung Fu Panda franchise, and the MCU. Next up, she will be joining the Avatar universe, and she’s doing the highly anticipated film adaptation of Wicked. She can and has done it all.


She is as much an action star as a dramatic performer, and Everything Everywhere All at Once is really the first time since Crouching Tiger in 2000 that she has been allowed to flex both muscles at once. She gives it everything she’s got in a career redefining performance that will most likely net her an Academy Award. As much as I prefer Cate Blanchett’s performance this year and as much as I feel like Everything Everywhere All at Once flounders as a film, it would be hard to begrudge Yeoh her flowers.


Cate Blanchett in TÁR – The fascinating thing to me about all of this is that in actually watching TÁR, this feels like a no-brainer. Blanchett is one of the finest actresses of her generation – probably of any generation – and this is the best she has ever been. There is no one capable of doing the things Blanchett can do when she’s working at this level, and the character of Lydia Tár practically demands she raise her game to heights heretofore unimagined.


Blanchett plays Tár as a wrecking ball, destroying everything in her path but without the self-awareness that a wrecking ball swings back the other way. She destroys her own life and looks outward for anyone to blame but herself. She doesn’t mind being thought of as a mad genius, but at the end of the day, she’s really just mad. Blanchett never takes a wrong step in guiding the audience down the path of decadence and self-destruction. We’re passengers. Blanchett is the conductor, and she takes us places no actor has ever gone before.


Ana de Armas in Blonde – I really wanted to like Blonde. I greatly enjoyed director Andrew Dominik’s two previous films to this one, The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford and Killing Them Softly. The casting of Ana de Armas as Marilyn Monroe is inspired. And, the behind-the-scenes pedigree is undeniable. The film, however, forces one to wonder what the hell any of these people thought they were doing. This is a disaster of epic proportions. 


The shame is that de Armas is damn good in the movie. She puts her whole self into the performance, mind, body, and soul. Unfortunately, over and over, Dominik proves that the only thing he is interested in is the body part of that equation. De Armas and the filmmakers are completely at odds over the film’s portrayal of Monroe. Somewhere in de Armas’ version, there is a good movie. Virtually none of that makes it into the movie we got. The nomination is earned as much for the performance as for what de Armas endured to bring anything resembling a human portrait out of the process. She deserved better.


Michelle Williams in The Fabelmans – Speaking of actresses nominated by the Academy for playing Marilyn Monroe, we come to Williams. This is the performers’ fifth nomination, including that 2012 Best Actress nod for My Week with Marilyn. She has yet to win, and she’s not really in the running this year, but she will get over the hump someday. She’s a magnificent actress, the Academy loves her, and still just 42, she has a lot more career in front of her.


All that said, I am not entirely sold on the Mitzi Fabelman character in Steven Spielberg’s film. Williams does a fine job with the role, and the sequence of her dancing on the family camping trip is a true standout scene from the year. But, I don’t see the depth in the character that Spielberg must have been hoping to bring out. She borders on one-note, a bit of a flibberty-gibbet who is just as likely to bring home a monkey as the groceries. Being that the whole movie revolves around Sammy Fabelman’s feelings about his mom and dad, there wasn’t enough there there for it to come together, despite Williams’ best efforts.


Andrea Riseborough in To Leslie – This is the performance there was so much fuss about. The poor, alcoholic screw-up trying to reconnect with family is nothing we haven’t seen before. Riseborough does it better than most, committing fully to the bit, but the movie doesn’t give her anywhere to go. She is hung out to dry, so to speak, playing the same scene over and over with different characters. First with her son. Then, her old friends. Then, her new boss. Then, strangers. It gets old quickly.


Riseborough’s portrayal of an alcoholic perpetually sinking to rock bottom feels true and lived in, lacking in the histrionics of most Hollywood portraits of the disease. If nothing else, To Leslie is evidence of the possibilities for Riseborough’s career as a leading lady. She has been a supporting player in a number of great films over the years such as Never Let Me Go, Birdman, and The Death of Stalin. If she ever gets to be the lead of a great movie worthy of her talents, this won’t be the last time we see her at the Oscars.


The final analysis


I don’t think anyone is going to argue that Michelle Yeoh is better in Everything Everywhere All at Once than Cate Blanchett is in TÁR, for whatever it means to compare art and performances. But, Yeoh is the performer of the moment. It is her time. Blanchett’s got two Oscars, and though the Academy is not above handing out a third – Frances McDormand just won her third – there is a sense that she’s been rewarded. All the stats be damned, the sentiment and the momentum are with Yeoh.


Will win: Michelle Yeoh in Everything Everywhere All at Once

Should win: Cate Blanchett in TÁR

Should have been here: Mia Goth in Pearl


A note about my favorite snub: Both Ellen Burstyn and Linda Blair got Oscar nominations for The Exorcist. Sissy Spacek and Piper Laurie made it in for Carrie. Hell, Kathy Bates won Best Actress for Misery. So, where are our modern horror nominations? This is a longer discussion, but the point is Mia Goth is on another level in Pearl. From dancing by herself in the cornfield to delivering that minutes-long monologue at the dinner table to that final shot, Pearl is a wholly unique creation that could only have been brought to life by Goth.


Next time: Best Picture

Tuesday, February 14, 2017

Countdown to the Oscars: Best Supporting Actress

Viola Davis is nominated for Best Supporting Actress for her work in Fences.

Welcome to Last Cinema Standing’s Countdown to the Oscars, our daily look at this year’s Academy Awards race. Be sure to check back every day leading up to the ceremony for analysis of each of the Academy’s 24 categories and more.

Best Supporting Actress


The nominees are:

Viola Davis for Fences
Naomie Harris for Moonlight
Nicole Kidman for Lion
Octavia Spencer for Hidden Figures
Michelle Williams for Manchester by the Sea

I promised yesterday I would rail against the obvious category fraud taking place here, so here it goes: Anyone who thinks Rose Maxson (Davis) is a supporting character in Fences is objectively, demonstrably wrong. Not only that, but to consider Rose a “supporting” character is to miss the entire point of her character and in many ways the point of August Wilson’s play, one of its many points, anyway. She is the heart, soul, and center of the story. The version of Fences in which Rose is a “supporting” character is not a version I wish to see.

So how does this narrative form, that Rose is a supporting character and Davis’ a supporting performance? It starts with the studio and its awards campaigners, who believe Davis’ best chance for winning an Oscar is in the Supporting Actress category. In truth, yes, the day it was announced Davis would be campaigned in Supporting Actress, the competition ended. Everyone else was playing for second place. But I cannot believe the critics fell in line with this absurd ruse, that the actors, who honored Davis at the Screen Actors Guild Awards, could not break her out of this box. It boggles the mind.

Now, I will stand up and cheer loudly and vigorously when Davis’ name is called out and she collects the Oscar statue she so richly deserves. Imagine, though, what it would have meant for the world to see the Academy, for just the second time in its 89-year history, to award a black actress Best Actress. It would have been one of the greatest moments in the history of the Academy Awards. Her victory, which is all but assured, will be sweet, but think how much sweeter it could have and should have been.

Viola Davis for Fences – In naming Davis’ work here the best performance by an actress in 2016, I called her a national treasure. This is no exaggeration. When given the kind of material she deserves, the kind that requires depth and honesty and truth and beauty and all of that, Davis delivers every time a performance of depth and honesty and truth and beauty and all of that. Rose Maxson is the role of a lifetime, and Davis, who won the Tony Award for this role when it played on Broadway – in lead actress for those keeping score at home – does not let it pass her by.

Davis is a three-time Oscar nominee, the first time in Supporting Actress for an actual supporting role in Doubt in 2008 and the second time for Best Actress for The Help in 2011. She was the prohibitive frontrunner for The Help but lost to Meryl Streep, who is of course Meryl Streep, so what can you do but tip your cap. There will be no such shock this year. Davis will win. She will receive a standing ovation. And it may just be the best moment of the night.

Naomie Harris for Moonlight – It may seem I am disrespecting the other performances nominated here by suggesting everyone else is playing for second. It is not meant as disrespect but as a show of my overwhelming respect for Davis. The other work cited here is all phenomenal, and Harris in particular delivers a performance of great range and complexity as a drug-addicted mother whose own son seems unknowable to her.

Harris famously had reservations about playing the crack-addicted mother Paula in Moonlight, fearing the trap of playing into obvious stereotypes and caricatures. She was convinced by writer-director Barry Jenkins’ investment in the character and by Paula’s complete emotional arc throughout the film.

The glory of Moonlight is that none of the characters is just one thing, and Harris takes this mission statement as an invitation to explore the rich nature of Paula’s past, present, and future. She strikes a deep vein of emotional truth, eliciting empathy even in Paula’s darkest moments. Were Davis properly cited in the lead category, Harris would be a good bet for the win here and a deserving winner without doubt. As it is, the nomination is likely the reward.

Nicole Kidman for Lion – Kidman may have one of the most difficult careers to pin down of any Hollywood leading lady. The perception of Kidman is that she is an A-list celebrity and movie star of the highest order. She already has won a Best Actress Oscar, for The Hours in 2002, and she has appeared in blockbuster-type films like Batman Forever and The Golden Compass, the relative success and quality of those films not being the point here. To dig deep into her list of credits, however, is to dig into the career of one of the most fearless, experimental, and versatile actresses of our time.

In Lion, she plays Sue Brierly, the adoptive mother of the Indian orphan at the center of the story. Her joy is palpable in offering a second chance at life to a lost child, as is her anguish when she feels that child growing up and slipping away from her. The role of adoptive mother is a thankless one in some ways because no matter your connection, the child has an instinct to know his real mother. This is particularly true in Sue’s case, since her son’s real mother is out there looking for him and never meant to lose him. Kidman plays this inner conflict to perfection, and through her, the audience understands the emotional stakes of the film.

Octavia Spencer for Hidden Figures – In some way or another, each of the women nominated in this category plays a character suffering through the pain of circumstance. There is a wife whose husband gets another woman pregnant, a single mother living in the slums, an adoptive mother losing her grip on her family, and a young mother who suffers a terrible tragedy. Finally, there is Dorothy Vaughan, played by Spencer, whose circumstances may be the most unfair of all. A brilliant mathematician, it is her unfortunate luck to be born a black woman into a segregated world.

What makes Hidden Figures and the women whose story the film tells so inspiring is that they do not allow their obstacles to define them. They define themselves by the ways in which they overcome those obstacles. Vaughan is the supervisor of the black women’s computer unit at NASA, but she is neither treated like a supervisor nor paid like one. Rather than be defeated or retreat into anger, she goes about making herself and her team indispensable, demanding to be noticed for her work simply by doing her work. Spencer, an Oscar winner in this category for The Help, is a joy to watch, playing Vaughan’s moment of triumph as a well-earned relief. Finally, she says, and we all agree.

Michelle Williams for Manchester by the Sea – Williams’ screen time as Randi in Manchester by the Sea is brief, limited to just a couple scenes, but her impact is tremendous. In a film built largely around emotionally devastating moments, Randi’s short, awkward, painful reunion with her ex-husband (Casey Affleck) may take the cake for most heartrending.

Randi is a woman whose new life is built on the ashes of unimaginable tragedy, and Williams shows us how she is always a word, a glance, a moment from everything crumbling into dust again. Watching her try to hold it together in the face of this knowledge is a marvel, and Williams is expert in conveying her fragile foundation. Affleck’s character demonstrates what happens when we bury grief too deeply, allowing it to become a part of who we are. Williams’ Randi is the other side of that coin, what happens when the grief is always right there, just under the surface.

The final analysis


Two words: Viola Davis. Four, if you prefer: Viola Davis, Oscar winner.

Will win: Viola Davis for Fences
Should win: Viola Davis for Fences
Should have been here: Judy Davis for The Dressmaker

Tomorrow: Best Foreign Language Film