Page 1 of 2
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 8:41 pm
by The Original BJ
I agree that, though this is a solid enough roster of actresses, I'd have voted DeWitt easily over all, and think it's genuinely disappointing she wasn't recognized much this season. I thought for sure she'd have picked up a critics' prize some place.
Cruz seemed like such an obvious Globe favorite -- star, foreign, in a film they picked for Best Comedy, no less. The question now seems to be: was Winslet the only thing standing in the way of Cruz's precursor victories, or do her losses when she seemed like a strong candidate indicate antipathy toward the performance?
I get a little bit of a Marcia Gay Harden vibe with respect to Viola Davis: respected workhouse of an actress in powerhouse role upsets a more lightweight, famous frontrunner who hadn't really been dominating the precursors.
Others may disagree, but I don't see either Henson or Tomei as very strong threats. I liked Henson, but can't imagine all that many people voting for her, even as a consolation prize for Button (which I still think will do well enough down-ballot.) Her role just seems so minor. As for Tomei, I liked her a lot, but can't imagine too many voters wanting to give her a second Oscar. (I guess you could say, most people couldn't imagine too many voters wanting to give her the FIRST, but I could see how a certain group of voters would want to reward her Vinny turn; this year, I think her previous win puts her all but out of contention.)
As others have said, it's nice that the Globe/SAG results have given us a more competitive race. In other years, we've seen candidates who didn't necessarily look like far-ahead front-runners (Angelina Jolie, Rachel Weisz) become widely predicted favorites after they won those two awards. Perhaps we'd have been in a similar situation with Cruz this year (or, who knows, maybe Amy Adams), and I'm glad we're not.
Well, unless Rosemarie DeWitt had won the Globe and SAG and was on track to an Oscar. :p
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 7:41 pm
by ITALIANO
It's not just the short screen time. I feel that Doubt the play was more admired and more successful that Doubt the movie (and I certainly hope that it was better), and also the Tonys are completely different than the Oscars, they often go to a different kind of performers for a different kind of roles. They can't be compared. I admit that I could be prejudiced here, since I found all the performances in the movie to be, how shall I put it, not bad actually, but really unremarkable. Very mechanical, very predictable, and very cold, like it happens sometimes when even a very good cast is at the end of a long theatrical run and each actor plays his or her roles just on the surface, without any real energy or emotion anymore (maybe a different director, one who hadnt written the play or been so familiar with it, or more simply a GOOD director, could have made a more interesting and lively movie, and definitely, with such talent, a better acted one). And Viola Davis's scene was, I think, dreadfully written, maybe not so bad on the stage but really absurd, and anachronistic, in a more realistic medium like film is. She wasn't ridiculous in it, which is I think the proof that she IS a good actress. But it's not an award worthy performance (I probably wouldnt even nominate her, though in such a poor year, who knows).
I don't think that Cruz was that great either, but she was better, and even more importantly, as I have often said before, she's even too obviously the typical winner in this category. So obviously that yes, it's tempting to think that a surprise could take place, but honestly I don't see why it should be the less likely nominee who will benefit from it. (As for the precursors, it's true that Kate Winslet's presence in the race for a while put an end to Cruz dominating the race, but for instance, and I know that I haven't any proof, I still think that there are hints that she would have won, if not the SAG award, definitely the Golden Globe.)
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 2:06 pm
by Jeffrey
Didn't Adriane Lenox win a Tony Award for Best Featured Actress in a Play for Doubt, playing the same role Viola Davis plays? Truncated performance time wasn't a factor for the Tonys in 2005 & probably won't be for the Academy in 2009.
Posted: Sun Feb 08, 2009 1:38 pm
by Mister Tee
Having now seen all five, I can say with certainty I'd have voted for Rosemary DeWitt over any of them. Not to mention either Amy Ryan or Cate Blanchett from last year.
Which isn't to disparage this group. They're all perfectly fine, and deserving enough of nominations (something I couldn't say of Ruby Dee last year, or numerous candidates in years past). But no one jumps out at me and says, Her -- she deserves it!
Cruz is in an odd position. Her sweep of the serious critics' groups, her overall fame and previous nomination all put her in strong position -- something I expected would be ratified by the TV-bestowers; the Globes, at least. But the run of the table by Winslet deprived Cruz of that confirmation, and has sent the race into an odd sort of suspended animation from which anyone, it feels like, could emerge the winner. The unexpected omission of Woody from the screenplay list also seems like it has to hurt Cruz's cause.
Of course, she could win BAFTA tonight, and again become the perceived front-runner. But the absence of Davis there makes it a less-than-ironclad test run.
When I touted Adams a few weeks back, it was only half in earnest, largely based on my own "She's so much better than that stage actress" response. But I'm starting to think she could really do it. Honestly, no one would completely surprise me -- thought I see Tomei and Henson as the longest shots.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 5:16 pm
by Big Magilla
dws1982 wrote:Big Magilla wrote:Chris Messina as Hall's fiancé does the Woody Allen/Tony Roberts bit as the opinionated New York guy.
I actually think Chris Messina played the Mia Farrow role--the decent but bland New Yorker who seems happy with the kind of life almost everyone else would find boring. Rebecca Hall played the Woody Allen role, less neurotically than Woody, with Bardem and Cruz in Sydney Pollack and Judy Davis roles from Husbands and Wives. And Scarlett Johnsson just played the Scarlett Johnsson role. (What a disappointment she's become in recent years.)
That's a very good observation.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 4:36 pm
by ITALIANO
Jeffrey wrote:For sure I now think that Viola Davis is a lock.
And you are wrong, I'm afraid. Especially after having seen Doubt, I'd say that Davis's is the typical performance that DOESN'T win an Oscar. Of course Best Supporting Actress is a traditionally unpredictable category, so Penelope Cruz - who, let's face it, is the PERFECT winner here - may eventually lose. But not to Viola Davis.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 4:32 pm
by dws1982
Big Magilla wrote:Chris Messina as Hall's fiancé does the Woody Allen/Tony Roberts bit as the opinionated New York guy.
I actually think Chris Messina played the Mia Farrow role--the decent but bland New Yorker who seems happy with the kind of life almost everyone else would find boring. Rebecca Hall played the Woody Allen role, less neurotically than Woody, with Bardem and Cruz in Sydney Pollack and Judy Davis roles from Husbands and Wives. And Scarlett Johnsson just played the Scarlett Johnsson role. (What a disappointment she's become in recent years.)
I didn't think it was badly shot (I saw it on Blu-Ray, and didn't notice any scenes out of focus), but I thought it was indifferently shot and edited. One thing about Allen's England films (or at least the two I saw) was that, whatever their flaws, there seemed to be some authenticity to them--to the (thankfully) non-neurotic British upper-crusts of Match Point, and to working class family of Cassandra's Dream (that was about the only redeeming facet of that one). They seemed to be movies that could have only With Vicky Cristina Barcelona, it's like he just wanted to vacation for the summer in Spain, so he cobbled together some bits from his past work, called up some actors, and assembled his crew. And if he had wanted to vacation in Italy, or Croatia, or Jamaica, or the Appalaichan foothills, he could have made essentially the same movie without any major changes. I would've liked a bit more than the travel Guide-Book portrait of Spain he gave us.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 3:08 pm
by Jeffrey
Thanks, Oscarguy, for explaining below how sometimes the Woody Allen connection works and sometimes it doesn't. I'd never thought of some of the things you mentioned before.
For sure I now think that Viola Davis is a lock.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 2:50 pm
by danfrank
It's a hunch, but I say Viola Davis wins. I think the trying-to-maintain-her-dignity-while-snot-runs-down-her-nose thing clinches it for her. Seriously, I thought she was terrific. Like Eric, I don't get why Henson was even nominated. Nothing wrong with the performance, but I didn't see anything in it that I haven't seen done a thousand times before. I liked Cruz, but I think the Academy is done rewarding a Woody film until he once again (if ever) does something truly outstanding. Adams is the kind of actress that the Academy would like to reward, but I think not for this performance. Tomei a two-time winner? I still haven't seen the film, but I think not.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:45 am
by Big Magilla
Damien wrote:Big Magilla wrote:Cruz was the best thing about that insufferable Woody Allen film, and although I'd hate to see that film go down in history as an Oscar winner for anything, a Cruz win would be a much easier pill to swallow than a win for the dreadful script which was rightfully ignored in the nominations.
Big, I can't understand your virulence towards Vicki Cristina Barcelona. I thought it was a nice little film, beautiful shot and splendidly acted. It must have pushed some buttons for you . . .
My review from http://www.oscarguy.com/DVD/09-January.html
If you're a Woody Allen fanatic you'll love his latest film, Vicky Cristina Barcelona. If not you'll find little to like in it.
The title doesn't refer to someone's name as might be expected, but is in fact the name of two friends, Vicky and Cristina, and the city they spend a summer in, Barcelona, Spain. The scenes of Barcelona and other Spanish locales are picture postcard perfect, but pretty pictures do not a movie make. The two women are vapid and annoyingly played by Rebecca Hall and Scarlett Johanssen who both seem to be channeling Diane Keaton in Annie Hall with their hair tugging, facial grimaces and halting speech. Chris Messina as Hall's fiancé does the Woody Allen/Tony Roberts bit as the opinionated New York guy. Only Javier Bardem as a bohemian artist and Penelope Cruz as his crazy wife offer something new in an Allen film. Cruz is good but one note in her Oscar-nominated role.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:41 am
by Penelope
Damien wrote:I thought it was a nice little film, beautiful shot
You're kidding, right? There were entire scenes that were out of focus! Some of the worst cinematography I've ever seen from a major filmmaker.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:39 am
by Damien
Big Magilla wrote:Cruz was the best thing about that insufferable Woody Allen film, and although I'd hate to see that film go down in history as an Oscar winner for anything, a Cruz win would be a much easier pill to swallow than a win for the dreadful script which was rightfully ignored in the nominations.
Big, I can't understand your virulence towards Vicki Cristina Barcelona. I thought it was a nice little film, beautiful shot and splendidly acted. It must have pushed some buttons for you . . .
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 11:10 am
by Big Magilla
This is the category whose winners I most often disagree with, but this year I have no problem with any of the nominees winning.
Henson is my choice but I would not be unhappy to see Davis win. Adams would be OK. Tomei, though unlikely, would at least give a rest to those persistent rumors that Jack Palance read the wrong name the first time she won. Cruz was the best thing about that insufferable Woody Allen film, and although I'd hate to see that film go down in history as an Oscar winner for anything, a Cruz win would be a much easier pill to swallow than a win for the dreadful script which was rightfully ignored in the nominations.
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:55 am
by flipp525
I'm still shocked that Elaine May couldn't find a spot in Best Supporting Actress that year for Small Time Crooks. Definitely one of the best comedic performances of the early 00's.
I think Italiano's last prophecy for this category was that Viola Davis could not possibly win.
Edited By flipp525 on 1233951081
Posted: Fri Feb 06, 2009 9:53 am
by OscarGuy
Well, if Tomei does win, I made the suggestion quite some time ago, getting shot down by Italiano that it would never happen, but I did make the suggestion and still think it's a possibility.
I think Cruz did peak early, which is probably why I didn't feel right predicting her winning way back in September and October when everyone said she was a slam dunk (and why I brought up Amy Ryan back then and got verbally maligned for it).
I think the Woody connection works sometimes and other times it doesn't. It didn't get Scarlett Johansson a nod for Match Point though many thought it might, it didn't earn Elaine May a nod despite talk that it might, Samantha Morton's perf in Sweet and Lowdown was an Oscar no-win, and then there was no Oscars for Judy Davis in Husbands and Wives.
Just because Dianne Wiest was followed up by Mira Sorvino in the '90s and then Dianne Wiest back in the '80s. That's it. I think this whole Woody's help to Supporting Actresses talk really came about when Sorvino won the year after Wiest won. It made people think Woody must have some gift with Supporting Actresses. Yet, it hasn't paid off for two nominees thus far and at least two others that were supposedly in contention without a nomination. So, I don't think the Woody connection is what will help Cruz.