The 11th Annual Who'll Be Back?

[FilmFan720]

And, of course, I fully expect to see Emily Blunt as a nominee very soon.

You almost wonder what it is going to take to get her a nomination? This year, in a weak category, she couldn't break through despite her film doing much better than expected in the tech categories. In 2006, she had a critically acclaimed supporting role that could have ridden Meryl Streep's coattails in but didn't. I think she needs a bonafide Best Picture nominee and she is in.

[The Original BJ]

I've been preparing to cite Michael Fassbender for the bonus pick for this for a while now, and was surprisingly pleased to come here and see him cited by so many, despite not really being in the running this year.

I'll also say Joseph Gordon-Levitt -- even though Mysterious Skin and (500) Days were both MIA at the Oscars, Gordon-Levitt's got that leading-man-with-cool-taste vibe that will make a nominee one day, likely when he gets a little older.

And, of course, I fully expect to see Emily Blunt as a nominee very soon.

[tootpadu]

Helen Mirren…The great lady proved one of Oscar’s recent precepts: once you’re a winner, you can slip in as filler for negligible work. Hopefully, better stuff is ahead, starting with The Tempest, which could be a fiasco or amazing. In any case, a prime candidate to make Oscar appearances for the foreseeable future.

I somehow get the impression with Helen Mirren, that she's taken over the "reveered british Dame" part in the Oscar game, formerly held by Dame Maggie Smith and Dame Judi Dench.

Which might mean that she'll be back numerous times, without ever winning again or, maybe, getting a supporting award somewhere down the line ...

[Mister Tee]

From '02 on I have these saved in various Word files, but, regrettably, I wasn't as scrupulous about preservation before then. So I can't offer chapter and verse of what I/we predicted.

I will say I was a pretty strong Penn advocate from way back -- I figured anyone who could manage nominations for such lightweight vehicles as Sweet and Lowdown and I Am Sam was going to win eventually.

I'm sure you're right, dws, that we'd have all expected Spacey and Allen back (shocking Allen's not even been nominated). I might have been a bit less dismissive of Bardem, since he was my best actor choice in 2000.

[anonymous1980]

Haley Joel Osment - What happened to that long career ahead of him?

He had some Oscar rumblings with A.I. (He deserved at least a nomination, IMO). But right now, he's focusing on college.

[Big Magilla]

Samantha Morton has a Best Actress nod for In America and won other awards recognition for Control and The Messenger. There's still a lot of love for her out there.

Both Annette Bening and Julianne Moore are early favorites for nominations this year for The Kids Are Alright though I suspect Anne Hathaway (Love and Other Drugs) will be the one to beat.

Janet McTeeer hasn't exactly disappeared. She recently received a Tony nod for Mary Stuart and an Emmy nod for Into the Storm (as Clementine Churchill). She's only 48 years old. She could well come back as a distinguished character actress in the years ahead.

[dws1982]

Ten years ago I don't think anyone would've bet against Spacey returning. I'll guess that most of us would've expected Jude Law to be in the winners circle by now, too. I'd love to see the 2000 Who'll Be Back thread, because I'd bet that most of us thought Joan Allen would be back (to win probably) again in the near future, and that Javier Bardem was a one-off.



Edited By dws1982 on 1268540967

[Sonic Youth]

Hard to believe I’ve been doing this for over a decade – back to the innocent days of “Can Russell Crowe come back?” and “Will Sean Penn ever win an Oscar?”. Herein, the 11th annual Who’ll Be Back?

It's interesting to step into the Hindsight Machine and see who did come back 10-11 years down the line. I have no idea if this will be a compelling read, but let's try it.

1999
*Kevin Spacey - Double Oscar winner, but hasn't been back once.
Russel Crowe - Came back the following year with a vengeance.
Richard Farnsworth - Alas, his last hurrah.
Sean Penn - Nominated several times, a double-Oscar winner by the end of the decade. Not bad for someone hated by the Academy.
Denzel Washington - Back only once more, but to win.

*Hillary Swank - Emerged from nowhere; now a double-winner.
Annette Bening - One more nomination in store, and again won by... let's not go there.
Janet McTeer - Send out a search party.
Julianne Moore - Two more nods, one more year.
Meryl Streep - Again... and again... and again... and again...

*Michael Caine - We'll see him one more time.
Jude Law - Same.
Tom Cruise - Nope.
Michael Clarke Duncan - Nope.
Haley Joel Osment - What happened to that long career ahead of him?

*Angelina Jolie - Just when everyone gave up on her, she squeaked one more nod by.
Samantha Morton - Only one nod, but one that set tongues wagging about how the Academy seems to love her.
Katherine Keener - One more nod.
Toni Collette - Nothing since then, but the BAFTAs seem to like her, and who'd have guessed she'd have a respectable (and award-winning) TV career ahead of her?
Chloe Sevigny - Nothing.

*Sam Mendes, Lasse Hallstrom, Spike Jonze, Michael Mann, M. Night Shayamalan -

Michael Mann went on to be nominated as a producer for The Aviator. Otherwise, not only will we not see these directors nominated for anything - directing or writing - in the '00s, but the reputations of a few of them will drop off considerably, reduced to shadows of their former selves, if not jokes, by decade's end. Still, Hallstrom will have one more Best Picture nom to his credit while being snubbed himself, and all of them (except Shyamalan) will manage at least one acting nomination and a few tech noms from their films.



Edited By Sonic Youth on 1268539320

[Mister Tee]

Credit my lingering illness for the unitentional snub of Anna Kendrick. Put on the spot, I'm not sure what I'd have written about her. I haven't seen her stage work or Camp, so I'm going totally on Up in the Air. I found her a bit brittle, far less relaxed than Clooney/Farmiga (though that was of course partially the role). I'd agree she's strictly in character actress territory, and in that vein may return, but I can't say I see a stellar career.

Sad to say I forgot Stuhlbarg, likely because he got so little attention from anyone but us Serious Man fans. I think he's likely to stick mostly to the stage for the time being, but he seems a solid character man.

Your mention of Fassbender reminds me I've got Hunger on tape, but I haven't quite worked it up to watch it yet.

It's encouraging to hear that True Grit at least aspires to be different -- though the original, while hardly great, is viewed as at such "classic" status that I wonder how people will respond to it. This news is in line with my belief, that the movies that should be remade are the ones that were bungled the first time -- completely the opposite of how Hollywood generally works. (I love Lanford Wilson's line from Burn This, that movies aren't supposed to be any good, and if they accidentally turn out well, they later remake them poorly like they were supposed to have been in the first place)

dws, your Renner scenario is certainly plausible, given Up in the Air's Oscar flame-out, and Hurt Locker's unexpected windfall. But you can never really say what one film's absence would do to the race, because you don't know what hyper-activity might have taken place in the thus-created vacuum. For all we know, Colin Firth might have won three times as many awards as he actually did, and have looked like the undeniable front-runner. Or not.

[FilmFan720]

Daniel, I have to strongly disagree about Anna Kendrick. Maybe it is because I have been a fan of hers since her days as a child Broadway actress, and I love her performance in Camp, but I think she will hold on as a character actress and will be back here again.

As for people who just missed out who will be back, I give you two more to add to the list. Diane Kruger made it a lot farther in the race this year than most would have imagined, and has had one of those solid, under-the-radar careers over the last 10 years that all she needs is one solid role to propel her to Oscar's stage. She has showed she has the chops, and she gets to work in interesting films with great directors. One right role should get her over the hump. Michael Stuhlbarg is one of those perfect fits for this thread, where you aren't sure where he is going to go: he could become a solid character actor in great films that will land him with a nomination some day, or he could be cast aside by Hollywood and go back to solid stage work. I see him giving another great film performance to get him to the Oscars some day, but whether it is sooner or in 20 years remains to be seen.

[Okri]

Yay! I was thinking of this before coming here.

Firstly, dws stole (stole) my pick of Michael Fassbender. He doesn't quite fit the role of newcomer denied, as he wasn't really an expected nominee, but I think he's the most likely. Not for The Talking Cure - it's a mediocre play. But sometime soon

Also, dws and I championed Andrew Garfield last year and he another one I think could do it. And thirdly Ben Wishaw.

re: Streep and Osage County: I just really want to this to be made into an awesome movie.

[dws1982]

I always look forward to this.

I may have misread, but I was under the impression that the new True Grit was going to be a new adaptation of the novel, rather than a remake of the film, which (supposedly; I haven't read the novel) had some pretty major changes from the book. I don't know what to think about it, given my strange relationship with the Coens, but films that are re-adaptations rather than remakes get a little bit of leeway in my book.

You left off Anna Kendrick, by the way. I'm not sure what to make of her chances. I thought she was terrible in Up in the Air, but she'll definitely have her chances at prime work in the next few years. I can't see her graduating to leading lady status, but I guess she could find a role that brings her back someday. I wouldn't bet on it though.

Jeremy Renner will be an interesting case. I tend to agree with you that we'll need to wait and see on him. For a few weeks now, I've been wondering...what if, as almost happened initially, Crazy Heart went straight to DVD. Obviously,we can't know for sure, but I can't help but wondering (especially considering that The Hurt Locker did very well Sunday night, winning several not-certain awards) if he might have pulled off an Adrien Brody style upset with Bridges out of the race. With Bridges gone, we probably would've seen Mortensen or Damon in the last spot--no one who would've really contended. Clooney might have swept in with the Globe and SAG and made it a non-contest, but I wonder if Jeremy Renner might have prevailed.

I tend to agree with most of your assessments. Bullock is an interesting case. She's at an age where the romantic comedies that have been her bread and butter will not sustain her much longer. But she's also one of the few working actresses who can get a film greenlit. She's mostly used this influence to reinforce typecasting in the romantic comedies (which is why she has an estimated net worth of nearly $100 million), but she has the power where she can not only find a role she wants, but she an get it made. More than maybe any other acting nominee, whether or not she comes back is definitely in her hands.

Non-nominees who might make the lineup soon. Anthony Mackie is a good choice. I'm going to, once again, put Michael Fassbender out there. To me he's the actor that everyone claims Daniel Day-Lewis is. He doesn't take easy roles; he doesn't make easy or obvious choices in them. (If someone from Inglourious Basterds had to be nominated, I would've nominated him.) Maybe his role as Carl Jung in The Talking Cure or Rochester in Jane Eyre will score.



Edited By dws1982 on 1268519692

[Mister Tee]

Sorry this is so late. I actually had it ready yesterday, but was Internet-blocked for 24 hours.

Hard to believe I’ve been doing this for over a decade – back to the innocent days of “Can Russell Crowe come back?” and “Will Sean Penn ever win an Oscar?”. Herein, the 11th annual Who’ll Be Back? – the survey of who among this year’s losers (or even winners) who we can expect to see make return engagements at the Kodak.

Jeff Bridges…He’s been a pretty intermittent presence at the Oscars – this was only his second nomination in 25 years – so the award had the feeling of a “let’s do it while we can” gold watch. But who knows? I find it hard to be excited about his True Grit (I despise remakes, and can’t make exceptions for favored directors and actors), but maybe it’ll turn out something special. And god knows he’ll keep working, so there might be more nominations ahead. But I don’t think that’s the way to bet.

George Clooney…He’s carved out a genuinely unique niche for this day and age: a male star who can bring in audiences for serious films. For a decade or more Tom Hanks was the only one with such a profile -- and his films suffered the limitations of the directors to whom he clung (Zemeckis & Howard, in particular). Clooney, along with buddies Damon and Pitt, has generally more adventuresome taste, so I fully expect him to appear on lists in the years just ahead. Another win, especially in lead, may always be elusive, given the Cary Grant syndrome we’ve discussed here before. Has he said anything about directing again? He might have a better shot there.

Colin Firth…It’s now two decades since many of us first heard Firth’s name, yet he seems like he might be just hitting his stride. I suppose his future Oscar chances might depend on how closely he sticks to British cinema – which might offer him better roles, but lower visibility. It’s entirely possible this was his one, best shot, but I wouldn’t lay bets either way.

Morgan Freeman…It seems to me two things might keep Freeman from more appearances at the Kodak: the insistence of Hollywood on casting him in near-saintly roles (of which many of us are already tired), and his age – in his mid-70s, and presumably free of money concerns from here to the grave, he might at some point decide to slow the wagon down. Of course, his buddy Clint is a role model for just the opposite approach. If he continues to work, and if writers and directors give him decent roles, he could certainly return.

Jeremy Renner…Certainly the year’s vaulter among men – the film itself didn’t raise his profile so much as the long Oscar season. He’s a very talented actor (see: Dahmer), but very much of the character sort, so he has to watch how he’s cast – seedy villains in summer action movies might deliver nice paydays, but could quickly erode his welcome. I’d presume at least at first the auteurist gang would be anxious to make use of his abilities. The next few years’ll be interesting to observe.

Sandra Bullock…Though I remain aghast at her selection, I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see her return. She’s obviously one of Hollywood’s bankable stars, and I’d imagine she’ll be anxious to prove this wasn’t a total one-off, meaning at least some attempts at drama are likely in the decade to come. One or two of those might get her back in the running – especially now that the idea of Oscar nominee Sandra Bullock is no longer unthinkable. The real oddball possibility? Someday she comes up with a performance that actually rates what she was given this year, and even skeptics like me will have to be willing to make her a two-Oscar actress. Couldn’t happen? Think Elizabeth Taylor.

Helen Mirren…The great lady proved one of Oscar’s recent precepts: once you’re a winner, you can slip in as filler for negligible work. Hopefully, better stuff is ahead, starting with The Tempest, which could be a fiasco or amazing. In any case, a prime candidate to make Oscar appearances for the foreseeable future.

Carey Mulligan… Except for a few grouches here, most of the world thinks Carey Mulligan has a shining career ahead. I’ll hold to my view, that this year would have been too-much-too-soon, and she’s far better off building up a record of achievement that could bring her to the winner’s circle while she’s still a relatively young woman. Hell, maybe even Never Let You Go could be the vehicle. In any case, I’m very much betting she’ll be back.

Gabourey Sidibe…I gather Howard Stern got in trouble for saying some crass things about Sidibe, but his gist was what anyone honest would admit: an actress who’s that specific a type might find herself with limited opportunities at this level. Interviews show her to be nothing at all like the introverted Precious, but the fact remains she is a very young, very overweight black woman (with little acting background), and, while there may be jobs in her niche, not that many of them are going to take her to the red carpet. She seems like a nice kid, and I’m happy to root for her, but she seems likely to remain a footnote.

Quick: who was the last person to win a lead Oscar for a comedy not nominated for best picture? Answer: Lee Marvin in Cat Ballou. And Ballou, with its screenplay/editing nods, probably would have cracked a best-of-ten list. Prior to that: Loretta Young, The Farmer’s Daughter. And that’s it: two such winners in all Oscar history. By contrast, more than 30 people have won the lead prize for dramas without their films competing for best film. In hindsight, this drama-preference was likely lethal to Streep’s chances Sunday night. (Even here, some are saying they’d have preferred Streep to win for last years’ Doubt, a prospect I find odd, but indicative of how lightly comedy is viewed)

Which brings us to…

Meryl Streep…The oddity of this year: with so many contests slam-dunks from the start, the person who picked up the most momentum was the 16-time nominee. I don’t think you can overstate, at this point, the ferocity Streep partisans will be displaying from here on. It’s no longer going to be “Isn’t it about time Meryl won again?”; it’s going to be, Goddammit, now it’s her turn – to a degree that alarms me, actually. I’m afraid we could end up with another Winslet -- rooters so determined to give her the win the performance itself will be only a sidebar factor. You know Meryl’s going to get some major dramatic role soon – Okri mentioned August: Osage County, something I’ve heard mentioned at least semi-seriously. Whatever the vehicle, assuming it’s a baity role (and the mother in Osage, with her nasty drug-hazed monologues, is a primo case), even in production it’s going to be touted as Meryl’s third Oscar. The nightmare, of course, is that something truly wonderful also comes along that year – something truly in touch with the cinema zeitgeist – and it’s passed over because it’s Meryl’s time. I fervently hope not. I very much wish that when the day comes Streep wins her third (and it’s when now, not if), I can give as pleased a cheer as I would have the other night. But Oscar voters, in their inimitable way, have made the situation more dicey.

Matt Damon…A decade or more of good work after his only previous nomination, and he gets cited for what few even considered his best work this year. How does one predict what’s ahead for Matt Damon after that? I wonder if he makes acting look too easy -- his splendid work in The Departed, for instance, was ignored for the more overt anguish DiCaprio offered. Or perhaps his boyish look has kept voters from taking him quite seriously. Aging over the next ten years should take care of that issue. In any event, his strongest asset is the same as Clooney’s: his propensity for seeking out strong directors. If he keeps doing interesting films, he’s going to get singled out again – let’s hope for something more deserving.

Woody Harrelson…Harrelson has quietly become a notable presence in interesting films. His nomination this year was popular (despite his film NOT being so); without the Waltz juggernaut, he might have really been in the running. I’m thinking he might turn up again in the years just ahead.

Christopher Plummer…Brutal honesty: I’m not one who thought Plummer was robbed ten years back – whatever was supposed to wow me about his Mike Wallace never reached my receptors. So this nomination meant very little to me, except as low-level, chanceless filler in a movie I’ll see when it hits DVD (though, as career tribute, I’m fine with it). He’s certainly a solid enough actor, and it’s not impossible he’ll score again. But logic suggests a guy who took his whole career to get this far once isn’t likely to scale the mountain a second time.

Stanley Tucci…How will Tucci’s nomination be remembered – as culmination of a couple of years’ solid work, or as a forgettable performance in a bad movie? (Tucci’s own reaction the other night suggested he’s in camp two) The latter might leave a sour taste in some voters’ mouths, and end Tucci’s recognition right here. But the former could set him up for a more serious shot just ahead. Two decades back, Denzel Washington and Tommy Lee Jones got initial, fruitless nominations, but within a few years were on stage giving acceptance speeches. I could see Tucci following this pattern.

Christoph Waltz…The from-nowhere comet is going to have difficulty matching the role Inglourious offered him. And, honestly, however impressive he was, we don’t know he can do anything beyond it. Presumably he’ll get chances just ahead, but my instinct says he’s a one-shot.

Penelope Cruz…A star big enough to salvage a nomination from a fiasco is not to be underestimated for future. She’ll get roles, at least in the immediate future, and she might well fill out ballots for the next decade.

Vera Farmiga…My personal pick-to-click of this year’s crop., She’s got a sensational persona, but doesn’t rely on it – even in the few years we’ve known her she’s given a nice range of performances. Now that she’s broken the Oscar ice, I think she’ll return with regularity, building toward a win at some point.

Maggie Gyllenhaal…An Oscar appearance for which many have been waiting some time; too bad the Mo’Nique juggernaut made it a relatively empty exercise. Hard to say if this means the actors’ branch has finally warmed to her, or if she simply picked up reflected Jeff Bridges glow. She’s certainly got talent, and could merit more nominations. Whether she’ll get them is a matter on which I’m not certain.

Mo’Nique…The knee-jerk response is, okay, hope you enjoyed it, that’s your life at the Oscars – the idea of a stand-up making a return being a difficult one to envision (Whoopi and Robin notwithstanding). But if she’s serious about pursuing serious acting --as her Hattie McDaniel project suggests – then maybe we shouldn’t write her off so quickly. I’d never have imagined her capable of what she did in Precious, so I’m certainly not going to bet against her now.

Kathryn Bigelow…Her sudden ascension to Oscar status begs the question, where does she go from here? Does she return to Point Break/Widowmaker-like action projects, or does she use this newfound recognition to broaden her subject-horizon? I assume she’ll always stick in some way to an action genre, but she could go the Greengrass route now – picking projects that place the action within historic or political contexts. My general instinct is this was her only Oscar, but the tendency of winning directors to return at least once can’t be overlooked.

James Cameron…Presuming it’ll take him another decade to make another movie, I don’t know we need to discusss him right now. Let’s leave it at this: every time he makes a movie that shatters the all-time box-office record, he’ll probably get another nomination.

Quentin Tarantino…Back on the list after lots of us had pushed him to sidelines in our thinking. Does this mark a resurgence? I’ve read some vague reports he’s semi-retiring; any truth to that? I guess the only honest thing to say is, I have no idea if we’ll see him again, but the son of a bitch has talent, so I can’t bet against him.

Jason Reitman…Who are we talking about – the guy who got two best director nods at an exceedingly young age, or the fellow who was denied what seemed a slam-dunk screenplay win? And was the latter, as the Hollywood rumor mill is suggesting, a rebuke to someone they think is getting too full of himself? I have no strong fix on his talent level yet – Up in the Air was a quantum leap over previous efforts, and may never be matched. But he’s certainly one to keep an eye on.

Lee Daniels…Many of us thought he wouldn’t even get this nomination, and most of us don’t like his work. But the Academy apparently really goes for him, his actors love him, and his next project will clearly get a good bit of attention. He could still go the way of Scott Hicks, but he’s at least going to get his shot.

The bonus round – picking the didn’t-quite-make-the-list-this-year contender who’ll be luckier sometime in the years ahead – is made difficult by the fact that so many of the almost’s were previous nominees: Damon and Mortensen in actor, Swinton in actress, Moore in support. Emily Blunt might seem a good choice, except I already chose her back in ’06. No, this year we have to zero in on the supporting actor slate, where, thanks to the apparent decision to freeze the field in mid-December, several solid candidates never got their due. Alfred Molina is one such, but he really reached this status after his Frida snub, and doesn’t seem a proper pick. I haven’t as yet seen Christian McKay, but I have to wonder if it was the simple fact he was playing an outsized figure like Orson Welles that got him attention, rather than innate ability. So, I’m going to salute Anthony Mackie, who somehow managed to ride The Hurt Locker express without ever getting the personal kudos many of us felt he deserved. A better outcome next time, sir.

I was going to wrap up with a somewhat snarky “The Oscars – will they be back?”, but I realized that’s going to be a somewhat elaborate topic, and I’m already too worn out from composing this. So…that’ll be a near-future thread. For now, consider the subject closed.