Mark Harris Jumps into the Fray – Davis Wins on Merit
Where I am shrill, hysterical and all over the place, Grantland’s Mark Harris is clear, defined and articulate – he says it all so well. Other than this site, Harris is the only Oscar blogger (well, he’s really an actual journalist) willing to “go there.” It isn’t just that I agree with him, it’s that he manages to articulate what I never could, find the balance between many different topics at once. He could write a great book on the subject:
So to clarify: In a category boasting five fine performances, I’d say Davis takes it on merit. Rooney Mara is terrific in The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo, but Lisbeth Salander would be a showcase for any young actress, and voters haven’t yet seen enough of Mara to assess what she gave the part that’s all her own. Glenn Close is constrained by a role that is entirely about being constrained; in Albert Nobbs, she creates a surface with impeccable precision, but the character’s interior is a mostly unfurnished room. And few other actresses could have combined technical brilliance (the voice, the walk, the breathing, the singing) with the intuitive empathy that Michelle Williams brought to My Week With Marilyn. But the movie’s version of Monroe is filtered through a protagonist so self-regarding that he can’t seem to decide whether his story is “The Week She Changed My Life” or “The Week I Changed Her Life.” That framework, a series of brief encounters with a smug, starstruck nit, rarely lets Williams go as deep as she clearly can.
That leaves Meryl Streep and Davis. And it’s close. Streep’s portrayal of the octogenarian Margaret Thatcher in dementia ranks with the greatest work she’s done. No actor alive better understands how to use elaborate makeup as a tool without being defined or buried by it; somehow, she becomes an imperious, frightened, and lost old woman struggling to remember her place in the world. Streep may be overstating matters to call the story “King Lear for girls,” but if she ever wants to play Lear, I’m there.
Unfortunately, that still leaves the other two-thirds of Iron Lady, which lets its subject down by insisting that the most — no, the only — interesting thing about Thatcher is that she was a woman in a world of male power. There’s a campy scene in Mommie Dearest(OK, many, but bear with me) when the widowed Joan Crawford tells off an all-male Mad Men-era boardroom by bellowing, “Don’t f— with me, fellas! This ain’t my first time at the rodeo!” That’s a fun idea for a moment, but not for a whole movie. And for a subject as complex as Thatcher, it’s fatal.
Harris doesn’t take comments but you can tweet him and open up the discussion there (don’t shoot the messenger). @MarkHarrisNYC but the Davis quotes after the cut – I really recommend his article, though. I’m going to declare it the best piece I’ve read on the Oscar race all year.
With her deep voice, her gravity, and her gift for restrained sorrow and quiet moral authority, Davis often gets cast as responsible people — detectives, doctors, social workers, cops. Once she was a mayor; once she was the head of the CIA. Either she hasn’t been asked to play a maid very often, or she has declined those roles; before The Help, her one memorable stint as a housekeeper was in Todd Haynes’ brilliant Far From Heaven, in which she and Haynes seemed to collaborate on an onscreen deconstruction of the qualities of a 1950s film domestic. The Help was different: At 45, Davis was finally given the opportunity to play the lead in a studio movie. (Are we really still not going to talk about race, and how much sooner that opportunity might have come otherwise?) But it meant wearing that uniform and holding a little blonde white girl in her lap while saying, “You is kind. You is smart. You is important.”
I don’t know what it cost Davis emotionally to go there for her first high-stakes starring role, or what argument, if any, she had with herself beforehand. I’ve talked to tough, smart black actresses who say that a great part is a great part, and other equally tough, smart black actresses who simply, categorically, do not want to play maids or slaves, just as I’ve met Arab-American actors who felt they had to turn down the golden opportunity to be killed by Kiefer Sutherland on 24. You don’t get to call them prima donnas unless you yourself have spent years facing the hard knowledge that regardless of your talent and training, a huge percentage of what you’re going to get offered is the chance to play an ethnic cliché. Yes, Hattie McDaniel elevated a caricature by dint of sheer talent. It was 72 years ago. In 2012, we should be further than we are past the sentimentality of Mammy’s “I done raise that chile from a baby.” The Help’s racial politics aren’t Gone With the Wind’s, but, as I wrote when the movie opened, it’s far too comfortable trafficking in clichés about super-maternal black women whose compassion and capacity to nurture always trumps their anger.
Faced with the peril of that archetype, Davis did the hardest job of anyone in the Best Actress category: She made the movie better — much better — without playing against it. Much of The Help is bright, candy-colored, and loud: It’s full of silly wigs and garish costumes, sitcom slapstick and shit pies, wicked old dears like Sissy Spacek, finger-snappin’ Designing Women tell-offs, and the kind of steroidal pivots from comedy to poignancy to melodrama that would shame an episode of Glee. What Davis gives the film is humanity. Aibileen is a gentle but wary woman — she’s lived long enough to know that in her world, you survive by bending, not breaking, by keeping your thoughts to yourself, by seeing and hearing everything while appearing to register very little, and by trying to apply your own sense of decency and kindness to a badly needed paying job in an often indecent and unkind world. When she’s on-screen, the hummingbird shrieks of the movie’s other characters are hushed; you’re reminded that the human toll of daily, casual racism doesn’t really get addressed by making Bryce Dallas Howard eat poo. Because Davis is a physically gifted actress who can incorporate the exhaustion and strain of being Aibileen into every motion and muscle, and also the rare performer — even in this year ofThe Artist and Max von Sydow — whose silences draw you even closer, she seems to correct The Help’s excesses without ever standing self-protectively outside it. At every turn, she un-simplifies the movie.
There are many ways Hollywood should respond to a performance that good. An Oscar would be a fine start. When she won the Screen Actors Guild award last month, Davis cited two actresses: Cicely Tyson, her inspiration in childhood, and Streep, her inspiration in college. Those names represent two different pasts and two possible futures. Tyson, whose early-‘70s performance in The Autobiography of Miss Jane Pittman moved Pauline Kael to praise her “supreme integrity” and predict that she was “on her way” to becoming one of the all-time greats, never had the career she should have had. Streep, on the other hand, continues to fulfill and then redefine everything we imagine a great actress can do. And Davis? She’s got a movie called Won’t Back Down in the can and has just signed for a couple of supporting roles, but the big thing? The movie built around her? The amazing new part that her starring role in a smash hit should bring about? The passion project she now has the clout to make? That hasn’t happened yet. An Oscar would represent acknowledgment for a job extremely well done. But maybe it could also serve as a kind of promise from an industry that knows it’s got to start meeting talent like hers at least halfway.
60 Comments
Leave a Comment
Tracker Pages
Recently on AD
Follow Us!
Tags
Gallery
Mark is a brilliant writer – I adore his book. The article seems a bit talking-out-of-two-sides-of-the-mouth to me.
He says Davis wins on “merit” but he can find no flaw with Meryl’s performance, only with the movie itself and with the character. And he finds a ton of flaws with The Help as well, but likes the character. So it’s not about merit, then, is it? It’s about the likeability of the character.
That’s fine, but he should not say it’s about merit when in his own article he doesn’t seem to think it’s about merit, at least those are not the words he’s using.
Wrong assessment of Meryl in The Iron Lady. To Phyllida and Meryl, when interviewed in Britain, and clearly understood by fellow Brits, the feminist battle is the SECOND factor.
What the film portrays brilliantly is CLASS, from the attitudes and reactions of characters, to outside, surface personal details. Meryl nails it.
Throughout the 1980s, the political arguments of Thatcher’s domestic policies, inside Britain, were argued in class terms. It was made worse because Mrs Thatcher’s ancestors were LOWER-MIDDLE CLASS. If she had been from any other class, lower even, there would be a lot more sympathy, more understanding, more attention.
These class subtleties, painfully evident in the film, Meryl played it brilliantly, with classic British nuances. She captured Thatcher trying to make herself less lower-middle class, Thatcher was uncomfortable amongst her own party of upper class and upper-middle class people (2 groups whom Meryl showed how Thatcher treated these 2 classes differently). And she needed these 2 groups of people to be Prime Minister. In the movie, she sits with men whose relatives are in the House of Lords, who being entitled by hereditary privilege, some dating to the Reformation in the 1500s, could stop any elected government from passing any law, because back then, only nobles are in the upper house.
I am amazed that an American, Meryl, can in her behavior of nerves, show accurately Thatcher in that kind of unhealthy class environment, so on edge, almost unrelatable and unlikable as a person, persona, ruthlessly diminishing men who by birth were higher than you in society and people you needed, you literally became a monster. And a monster that had to charm by sex too.
@Jorge
It seems that Mr. Harris saying that even though both films have their huge faults, Davis elevates her film in a way that Streep doesn’t. (penultimate paragraph)
I can’t really comment on the matter personally yet since I’ve yet to see TIL.
“Where I am shrill, hysterical and all over the place…”
NEVER!!!
I love Harris. The only thing he might have added, to help his case, is that there’s no Marion Cotillard in La Vie en Rose or Helen Mirren in The Queen in the race – there’s no hands-down, jaw-dropping, clearly-lead, can’t-stop-telling-your-friends performance to choose amongst the five. Like the last couple of years in this category, we’re choosing among the problematic, either because of role or film. Having said that is having said that: just the icing on his argument’s delicious cake.
Finally an argument that focuses on the performances – thank you, Mark Harris. I disagree on the Mara assessment, but that’s subjective.
Now, if only everyone would follow the same path. What’s odd about this race, this year, is that the primary arguments promoting the two perceived frontrunners have little to do with the actual performances and more to do with “what’s owing” to both actors. That’s an easy ploy – hell, you don’t have to have seen the movies to have an opinion. Both Davis and Streep deserve our respect for the work that they did, but both camps are guilty of an easy, cheap and sad campaign.
@Aubrey: Great defense of Iron Lady. It’s not so much that Harris gives the film short shrift, but that he doesn’t acknowledge any possible double-standard in a column that explicitly criticizes “people who like to believe that the whole thing was settled long ago” regarding racism but appears to act as just such a person regarding (a film about) sexism.
@steve50: I can’t help but notice that the focus on “what’s owing”, as you call it, is dominating this year’s Best Actress race during the same year that both frontrunners happen to be over 40. Outside of Helen Mirren and The Queen (which was a slam-dunk), I don’t think any Best Actress race of the last 15 years had quite this much “what’s owing”-ness – because the younger frontrunner was just a pretty thing who’d earned it. I guess what I’m saying is you put ANY two actresses over 40 in the head of this race, expect to see a lot of “what’s owing.”
Now this is getting damn near ridiculous. You want Viola Davis to win and she probably will. WE GET IT. LET’S MOVE NOW SHALL WE? DAMN!!!!!!
Im reading an awfully lot of things that sound like, “the book is bad because a white woman wrote it…the film is bad because a white guy directed and adapted it…but Viola Davis should win!!!” racism indeed…
Michelle Williams, hands down, had the toughest role, did a brilliant job with a seemingly impossible task, and is the actual lead!!! She will be robbed for sure.
I think Viola wins on merit. Maid or not, she gave a hell of a lot in that performance. I don’t think she phoned-in anything.
That said, I think Meryl was able to do amazing things with old Thatcher. Michelle Williams had an incredibly hard role and did very well with it. Mara lends something different to the Lisbeth Salander role than her superior, Noomi Rapace. And Glenn Close, well, she gave it her all in her pet project.
In other words, I’m fine if either Viola or Meryl win. And the rest of the noms are impressive in their won rights.
its still a good performance in an average movie…. i’d rather the oscar winner be a part of a better film… actually i think mara is the best candidate under those conditions… i’d be fine with Michelle Williams (even though she’s had 2 performances that are easily better than this)
Streep won’t win. She’s in a movie that no one likes about a contentious political figure. The film, as mediocre as it is, damages her chances.
Viola, on the other hand, is in a film that people really like and is nominated multiple times and she’s terrific in it.
And let’s not forget that when the two of them went head-to-head in Doubt, Davis blew her off the screen
Rooney Mara is my favorite performance of the year but I’ll be very happy with a Viola Davis win.
Finally saw the The Help and I’m stumped by Chastain’s nomination. And – whoa – Howard ruined the movie. We were laughing.
@ Deena Jones wig – it is their site, they can do what they want and post what they want. If you do not like it – save the energy in commenting and look elsewhere and as you say “move on”.
@ Sasha – love how you are not being neutral and letting your voice be heard – haters be damned!
I learned the hard way not to be negative in the comments and especially how not to piss off the editors with direct/passive aggressive/purely aggressive attacks. If you can’t say anything nice or get your arguments across in a non abrasive manner then don’t bother.
In regards to the article I love his write up about Streep and Davis, although it did not touch on what I found missing from the performance itself. It is difficult to put into words but watching the movies I did not feel that Streep was able to find a way to relate to Thatcher during her political days – it almost felt as though she were going through the motions, doing a wonderful impersonation without any real soul. It must be difficult to play someone who you do not agree with, and in this performance it showed. It was only in the later years of Thatchers life that Meryl was able to humanise her – and those moments in the film were wonderful.
Deena, if you are so annoyed, why bother visiting the site ? I really don’t think you have the authority to tell Sasha what she can/should post and what she should not. You are free to create your own blog and write whatever you want there.
Offtopic, but Daniel Radcliffe just unloaded on AMPAS (and Martin Scorsese a bit): http://popwatch.ew.com/2012/02/07/harry-potter-oscars-daniel-radcliffe/
Money quote, as reported in The Guardian: “I don’t think the Oscars like commercial films, or kids’ films, unless they’re directed by Martin Scorsese. I was watching Hugo the other day and going, ‘Why is this nominated and we’re not?’ I was slightly miffed… There’s a certain amount of snobbery. It’s kind of disheartening. I never thought I’d care. But it would’ve been nice to have some recognition, just for the hours put in.”
Wow.
I say Streep wins on merit. I think many don’t like the fact that Streep plays a conserative Prime Minister, a very loathsome politician.
@spacey
Streep gave that scene to Davis in Doubt.
Mara is my favorite nominee, but she’s in a film where all its aspects are equally impeccable (from the cinematography and editing to the screenplay and direction). She’s terrifying, dangerous, sexy, vulnerable, cold. From the physical transformation to the creation of this iconic character, she nails it.
Close creates this great persona, but we never get to see what’s going on inside this character, and I blame the screenplay.
Davis is brilliant and hits all the right notes, but she doesn’t steal the show. The entire cast does. Chastain, Spencer and Howard all have their moments of brilliance. Davis had the meatier part and she nails it, but I can’t say that she carried the film. All the ladies did in this film.
Williams created Monroe in a lovely way. From the singing, breathing voice and mannerisms to the creation of a delicate insecure creature and her agony as an actress, it was like she portrayed three different characters in one film. Yes, the film doesn’t help her elevate the material, but she’s a scene-stealer and she deserves credits.
Streep has the worst film of the bunch to deal with, but, boy, she nails it. From the mannerisms and voice of Thatcher to her inner battles through the years of dementia, she’s one of the few actresses who – as Harris said – manage to use the makeup properly and not get buried under it (cough, DiCaprio, cough). And this is her best performance since ‘Prada’.
So I’d say that I rank them this way:
1. Mara
2. Williams
3. Streep
4. Davis
5. Close
It’s a tough year. We know that Mara is the newcomer, Close’s is a ‘welcome back’ nomination and the battle is between Streep, Davis and Williams (who comes third, but might surprise with a BAFTA win), but I don’t know whom to choose. Davis is in the better film, Streep gave the most difficult performance, and Williams is somewhere between Davis and Streep (better film than Streep’s, a bit less difficult than hers, still more demanding than Davis’s).
Close should not even be a nominee, as her film wasn’t released nationally until this year.
@KJBacon…Chastain was the best thing about The Help…yah, it’s a camp role, but that scene where she learns that she is an outcast is completely devastating and shows that no matter how campy she appears, she’s still just a human.
@brandz
– “But it would’ve been nice to have some recognition, just for the hours put in.”
– Wow.
Wow indeed. Sort of lost his grip on that whine at the end there, didn’t he? Let’s see his timecard, add up all the hours. Why isn’t there an Oscar category for “Best Use of an Actor’s Precious Youth” So Unfair!
I am still too pissed about Tilda Swinton being snubbed for We Need To Talk About Kevin to get worked up about who should win the Best Actress category. It seems like we have an embarrassment of riches this year. Too many great peformances from actresses in movies that actually centered around women.
I would definitely say, no matter what its flaws were, The Iron Lady was a superior film to The Help. When it comes to the actual performances, it really is a toss up. Either one could win and I would be very happy. Both actresses will be nominated again in this category very soon, I have no doubt, and will have another chance to win if they lose this year.
PaulH, Albert Nobbs met the Academy’s eligibility requirements.
Not a badly written article, but his reason for preferring Davis over Streep seems simply that she likes the character of the former more.
I haven’t seen either of them yet (TIL wasn’t even released here yet, and The Help only opened last Friday), so I personally don’t care much, specially because my favorites of the year, Juliette Binoche and Kirsten Dunst, didn’t come even close to a nomination, despite (or because) being in two movies better than any of the BP nominees.
Streep is a near lock for BAFTA (the bookies have her winning in a walk) which should give her the edge for Oscar.
Streep is a near lock for BAFTA (the bookies have her winning in a walk) which should give her the edge for Oscar.
yeah, we all recall how fast his BAFTA win propelled Mickey Rourke to an Oscar.
yeah, we all remember how fast the BAFTA win propelled Tilda Swinton and Marion Cotillard to an Oscar.
I’m sorry but, when there is doubt… Morgan Freeman derseved his award in 2004, he won it on merit. But about Davis I have my doubts (it’s my opinion, of course).
> “Davis did the hardest job of anyone in the Best Actress category: She made the movie better — much better — without playing against it. ”
Love this statement!!
Of course she wins on merit. Just like Berry, Witherspoon, Roberts and Bullock. The Oscars have to have its stars moment and have to award a lifetime effort to take a big role for a fantastic actress that is not given the opportunities others have. In terms of performance, of course she doesn’t deserve. But deserves for the reasons I listed.
Morgan Freeman win was absolutely deserving: for the performance and for the fantastic career he had. One thing I can`t understand is how people here seem to love more dark films or ones who deal with tough issues like The Departed ,No Country For Old Men and The Hurt Locker but think The Aviator (for me along, with Kundun, are 2 films that I though boring and far far far away from Scorsese`s best… The Aviator looks like a Tom Hooper film… everything is too perfect) and dismiss Million Dollar Baby win, which is a movie that doesn`t have a happy ending and deals with a very tough issue.
but PREFER The Aviator over Million Dollar Baby.
Very well written article. He makes some strong points about Davis and what she does with the role that’s given to her.
But seeing as he didn’t really have anything bad to say about Streep’s performance, only about the movie, and had equally bad things to say about The Help, seems like he’s saying Davis should win based only on the fact that she managed to make her movie better than Streep managed for hers. He’s forgetting that Davis had Spencer and Chastain (both nominated, one of them winning) and a whole bunch of other actress while Streep had Jim Broadbent and make up.
Sounds a bit biased overall. But really great writing.
Well, Lisbeth Salander is not a showcase for any young actress. The role is very easy to do SO wrong without really understanding the character and the collaboration with the director is indeed of high importance. The only actress I think MAY have been in the same league when it comes to creating Lisbeth Salander and make her a 3 dimensional character is Evan Rachel Wood. There is something about Wood that is similar in Mara. Hardness, toughness, beauty, intelligent, shyness and physicallity.
Another thing is that Noomi Rapace owns Lisbeth Salander and still Mara did create a character of her own and really OWNS it. Congrats to Mara the non monkey Oscar campaign dancer. I love you
Michelle Williams could do oh so wrong. When I saw the trailer I thought, well another half campy Monroe performance. But while watching her, you forget Williams and starts explore and enjoy Monroe. Williams breathes another life into Monroe and a peak of how miserable she really was. Made me understand why she died so young
This year has the unfortunate distinction that the best performance in each category did not make to the nominees:
Actor: Michael Shannon
Actress: Tilda Swinton
Sup. Actor: Albert Brooks
Sup. Actress: Vanessa Redgrave
This may be a bit off topic, but am I the only one out here who had to resist hurling my tub of popcorn at the screen every time Jim Broadbent popped up in The Iron Lady?
I honestly don’t care who wins. I thought Davis, Williams and Streep were all wonderful in their problematic films and I think each of them deserves to win.. Mara is fine, too, but I just don’t think she should win over the other three, not for her first big role which had already been interpreted well (and in my opinion better) by a Swedish actress. I haven’t seen Close.
Well written?
His arguments on Viola’s acting were misplaced. Her acting was super, but the writer is drawn to the character, not the acting.
He is not drawn to the Thatcher character. Tell that to my fellow countrymen–they didn’t like her but they voted for her and she bloody won the elections 3 times!
Likewise, Meryl nails Thatcher’s unlikable to the core, to the soul. You’ll never connect to that character, real Thatcher nor Meryl Thatcher. If you do, the British will think you Barmy. That’s the greatest challenge. But Meryl made Thatcher human.
And as I explained, the writer’s a Yank who doesn’t understand the complexities of the British class system nor lived through it, so he gets the main thrust of the film wrong. Class in England, which is what Phyllida and Abi said and everyone in Britain understands when they watch it painfully in The Iron Lady.
I hate that so many people win because they’re “owed” an oscar. No one is “owed” anything. But if we’re going with who is owed, why is Davis owed?? At least in the case of Bullock and Roberts, they had many many films (not award worthy, but they were workin the system nonetheless) and thy each made billions for the film industry. How can Davis compare to that? Why is she “owed”? Because of race? Is that why she’s “owed”?
Manrico 1967:
(My God! I think I’ve found my soul-mate.)
Actor: Michael Shannon
Actress: Tilda Swinton
Sup. Actor: Albert Brooks
Sup. Actress: Vanessa Redgrave
Those are my choices EXACTLY as well for the past year! And none of the above are even given a shot at Oscar this year. What a terrible shame.
Keep your eyes on BAFTA. And yes, it DID propell both Marion Cotillard and Tilda Swinton to their Oscar wins. It could’ve propelled Mickey Rourke, too, if he hadn’t dropped so many F-bombs. It’s SUCH a close race! Best Actor is too! And this is a BORING year for Oscar? I don’t find it so! Great piece by Mark Harris, and Sasha, you’re as good a writer as he is. And YES, you’re a journalist, too.
Williams and Streep sort of face the same challenges — both playing iconic real-life figures, both challenging roles that would be hard for any actor to ‘live up to’ the real thing, and as it turned out, both had to single-handedly carry what ended up being otherwise pretty average-to-forgettable films. The difference, though, is that whereas everyone immediately thought, “Oh man, Streep as Thatcher, she’ll hit that out of the park,” there were a lot more question marks as to whether Williams could deliver. And deliver she did, I might add — if I had a vote, I’d go for Williams.
My general rule for the Oscars is that as long as the actual winner is worthy, I don’t mind if the MOST worthy person in my view loses. For instance, while my vote would go to Williams, I would have no problem at all with Davis or Streep winning since their performances were also excellent and above my mental bar of what constitutes an Oscar-winning performance. It’d be distressing to see Close win for her weirdly limiting role and as for Mara, well, I simply can’t escape the fact that Noomi Rapace delivered a better performance in the same role just one year ago.
Re: Radcliffe’s quote. Good lord, what sour grapes. Hugo is better than all of the Potter films combined. Maybe if the HP producers had entrusted the series to a real directing talent (Cuaron excepted) rather than piddle around with third-raters like Yates or Columbus, the Potter films could have risen above just being cash cow visual aids to the novels.
@Vincent – Viola Davis is “owed,” if you will, because she has been an outstanding character actress in film and TV for more than 15 years, not to mention a Tony Award-winning theatre actress. She gave powerful performances in films such as Out of Sight, Traffic, Far From Heaven, Antwone Fisher, Solaris, Syriana, Doubt, State of Play, Trust, The Help, and Extremely Loud & Incredibly Close, to name just a few items on her resume.
@Beth, by that standard, Glenn Close is “owed” far more than Ms. Davis. Hey, Scarlett Johansson has a Tony, and has done some great work, too. She’s owed too, then? Right? Or is it different for some reason? Kind of like how on another thread on this board, it’s considered “cool,” and “antiestablishment” and “bucking the system” for Mo’Nique to not have “worked the circuit” for her Oscar. But, Rooney Mara, who is being penalized for similar behavior. Interesting, no?
Also, simply being in a film does not mean she gave a “powerful” performance. She’s a great actor, I agree. She’s great in a supporting role being thrown into the lead category. But, as I said earlier, it’s also interesting to me that everyone complained that this book was written by a white woman and that the film was adapted and directed by this white man; however, without these people, there would have been no performance for Ms. Davis to be “owed” an Oscar for. Where’s their recognition?
Also, I can barely remember her from “Far From Heaven” and “Out of Sight”-to be fair, it’s been ages since I’ve seen those films. I just saw “Extremely Loud and Incredibly Closer.” What about her work in that was “powerful”? It was fine, nothing special. So, I’m just curious, why the status??
Yea by this standard so many actresses are “owed” that it’s not even funny.
Let’s remember that you have to have something extra special, a touch of pure raw talent, that out of all those movies you mentioned Beth I only saw in Doubt and The Help (very similar methods of playing different roles I might add) from Davis. She has now emerged as probably the moment’s best black actress and she is fantastic, no doubt. But let’s not go around saying she’s “owed” an Oscar, that’s just silly.
“She made the movie better — much better — without playing against it. “
If this is the best argument for Viola to win, I say Janet McTeer should win Supporting Actress too. She made a bad film much much better.
I`m not saying The Help is Albert Nobbs. It`s a much better film. But… McTeer made it much better without playing against it.
@JP: agreed. If anyone really deserves the Sup. Actress Oscar it’s McTeer. But I wouldn’t mind seeing Chastain get it either just because of the amazing year she had, and how different she was in The Help compared to the rest of her films. She deserves a lot of kudos for that.
Of course, neither of them will win unfortunately.
I’m hoping Jessica Chastain will win for “The Help”. I found her performance to be so refreshing in that movie, and so unlike anything else she did this year. I think the Academy got it wrong, though; Chastain’s best acting performance this year was in “Take Shelter”. She was absolutely amazing in that movie. Michael Shannon was my choice this year for Best Actor in that movie.
I encourage everyone out there to check it out if you haven’t seen “Take Shelter” yet; it’s kind of a creepy movie (but really interesting to watch and has great acting by all cast members). It’s a movie that has quite haunted me since I saw it a couple months ago.
@ Keifer: Agreed, Chastain’s best performance was in Take Shelter, and if it wenre’t for the ending which really disappointed me that movie would have been a bonafide masterpiece in my eyes. Shannon was tremendous.
Once again, somebody say the same thing: Davis deserve it for being black and playing a likeable character.
The writer says Davis deserves it on merit, but then he starts to talk about Davis being black and the likeability of her character.
Why can’t we be honest?? Davis will win, just because she’s black and her movie is a feel-good film with a big Box Office. If this was on merit, Meryl would win by far, followed possibly by Williams. But no, we are watching yet another year when the Academy chooses to give the Oscar not to the best performance……..they rather give the Oscar to overdues (Winslet, Dench), cute women who will never have another shot (Bullock, Witherspoon), black people to show they’re not racists (Berry, this year surely Davis).
Yes, The Iron Lady is very flawed, but Streep is flawless and superior to anyone this year. Davis gives an extended version of her Doubt character and she’s NOT even lead in The Help, Emma Stone is the lead character.
Hypocrisy is a bad thing…….just be honest and admit the Academy rarely gives the Oscar to the best performance of the year.
Well, for myself, I don’t think anyone this year is owed an Oscar (except maybe Max von Sydow, but I’d hate to see him win for that icky movie). But if we’re comparing who’s supposedly “owed” then Viola stands on firm footing just like Glenn or Meryl or Michelle (not so much Rooney, as she’s brand new). How anyone could not be hugely impressed by her powerful work in Solaris and Antwone Fisher is beyond my grasp. She’s a veteran character actress who has paid her dues and this year she gave a compelling performance in a beloved movie (not that I’m a big fan of The Help, but as Mark Harris says, she elevates the material and gives it much-needed gravitas). Over the past decade she has won not one, but two Tonys, plus two Drama Desk awards, and has been nominated for her past film work by the Independent Spirits and the Oscars. So when people question her credentials and ask what she has ever done beyond Doubt and The Help, I’m amazed.
Viola is not the best performance but it`s deserving in some way. Just like Reese Witherspoon (who should have been nominated for her best role in Election a few years before she won) and Sandra Bullock were for other reasons.
Meryl Streep gave the best performance of the year, male or female. It’s clear that Viola if winning she shall do for many reasons and not necessary por talent because she does, she did a great acting but we can’t deny the racial debt, although Meryl Streep gave the best work of the year.
LOL
Streep did NOT give the best performance of the year. She didn’t even give the BEST female performance in her damm category. Viola excels in The Help and owns the role when the film doesn’t even capture her true talent. Face it, this woman has NEVER giving a bad performance. To even compare her to the likes of Witherspoon, Bullock, and Berry is truly delusional.
Davis
Mara
Streep
Williams
Close
Those are my rankings
@kendallamc can we agree to disagree?
My rank is this one:
Streep
Davis
Williams
Close
Mara
I just saw THE IRON LADY, and I’ll just say that if Streep wins it will be for the worst movie containing an Oscar-winning performance since Forest Whitaker won for THE LAST KING OF SCOTLAND, only it’s even worse. All I can figure is that Phyllida Lloyd made the movie as a showcase for Streep; it can’t be because she had something to say about Margaret Thatcher, or British history or politics, or anything, because she doesn’t. At least Whitaker had a character arc in LAST KING. That film’s problem was akin to that of MY WEEK WITH MARILYN or ME AND ORSON WELLES, the story of a historical icon with a young non-entity at its center. But THE IRON LADY is even worse. Given that the arc Streep has to play, if one can call it that, is about a disoriented old lady, who just happens to have been Prime Minister of Britain once, it’s all the more remarkable that she’s as good as she is.
Part of being a star for whom projects are conceived is discerning when a script is good enough to be produced and when it isn’t. THE IRON LADY reminds me of what Roger Ebert in 1992 said about CHAPLIN, that Robert Downey Jr. was ready to be Charlie Chaplin in any movie any movie had made. But again, Richard Attenborough’s Chaplin character at least made sense; it just couldn’t possibly tell Chaplin’s story in 135 minutes. Downey did not have the clout to tell an Oscar-winning director how to make movies, although it’s hard to imagine that Attenborough could have made the film without him.
If Streep wins, it will be for a movie no one will ever, ever watch after this year. Is that what all you Streep enthusiasts out there want?
Davis does have a character she can flesh out, unlike Streep. I agree with Harris that Davis deepens the character and makes THE HELP a different, more serious film in all her scenes. This is what Oscar-winning performances are supposed to do.