NOTE: Gone Girl, novel and a movie, is thick with surprising twists. If you don’t want to stumble across hints about those twists then you should hold off reading anything about the story until after you see the movie. This article is no exception. Beware. Here be spoilers.
When was the last time anyone saw an actor transform themselves so dramatically as Rosamund Pike has done in Gone Girl? The demure, soft spoken Pike has reached down deep and uncovered one of the most mesmerizing femme fatales, one of the most memorable movie blondes, in film history. There aren’t many directors in town who give a damn about actresses anymore. If they don’t sell, if it doesn’t appeal to the mostly male bloggers and critics, forget it. It doesn’t get made. Fincher is one of the few who can and does get those movies made. And not since Hitchcock has a director been so good at transforming an under-the-radar actress into an icon.
The serene actress has always been cast as either the sweet love interest or the ice queen. No one has ever looked at Rosamund Pike and thought: there’s a versatile actress who could take on such complex, tricky material as Amy Dunne in Gone Girl. If people were paying attention, which half of them aren’t let’s face it, they would recognize Amy Dunne as one of the most notable female anti-heroes in literature and now, on film. If they were paying attention, they would also notice that casting Amy Dunne was not unlike casting the big roles in lit history, like Scarlett in Gone with the Wind and Daisy in the Great Gatsby. As it stands, critics and bloggers barely notice women at all, let alone a central figure in an American classic as written by Gillian Flynn.
Pike dives naked into this part, peeling back her mask of beauty and mannered composure to reveal the sinister truth that lies beneath many of Type A female. Without giving too much away, Pike’s Amy Dunne toys cleverly with our expectations based on her outward appearance that she immediately has the upper hand in all situations. Women, as we know, are judged mostly on their looks first. Dunne knows this is the best card she can play because her good looks are disarming, intimidating, unattainable. That gives her an immediate upper hand. All that she really is, all that she really wants, her precious bloated ego is buried underneath the serene and sparkly surface. What man, or woman, could defend against it?
What I love so much about Pike’s version of Amy Dunne is that we fall for it, too. We fall for those high cheekbones, those sweetly wide brown eyes, that Grace Kelly smile. We women fall for it each and every time we flip through a fashion magazine. We long for it when we see a celebrity wife dropping her children off at soccer practice or strolling along with a yoga mat in hand. We ache to be so perfect. What a strange gift Gillian Flynn and David Fincher have given us with Amy Dunne — a cunning genius who knows people well and can thus predict their next move. She is the best chess player in the game and, like Maddie Walker in Body Heat, if people are dumb enough to fall for it they deserve what they get.
Despite the Eve Harringtons, the Maddie Walkers and now, the Amy Dunnes, good looks are still the best decoy when looking to deceive a dumb chump. Maybe we get one movie a decade at most where the female is the smartest character in the whole movie. Women strive to be good more than anything else. Good mothers, good wives, good fucks, good kissers, good looking, good little girls. But, as the line goes, “Sometimes you have to be a high-riding bitch, Dolores. Sometimes being a bitch is all a woman has to hold on to.” You might judge her, siding with the affable puppy dog that is Nick Dunne and that’s fine. No one deserves to be nailed to the wall when they’re so accustomed to life going their way.
A serene facade shattered, a sculpted body ruined then remade, while underneath it all the quiet hum of vulnerability. Amy Dunne might be a monster. She might be the sum total of all of your worst fears about women, especially pretty women. But she has also cut up like paper dolls society’s expectations of women — the unending torture device of self-improvement, the big lie of the fairy tale wedding and the happily ever after. Amy Dunne is the end result of what our culture has done to women.
Gillian Flynn toys with our expectations in most of her writing, at least what I’ve read. She is a master at flipping what we predict is going to happen. She had me completely fooled with the book, Gone Girl. When people talk about the ending, when men groan and women complain because something about it just isn’t fair — I always give a silent salute to Ms. Flynn for sticking with the truth, both about her writing and about human nature. These characters are always betraying their best intentions. They can no more explain what they do or why do it than they can ultimately change who they are.
Women don’t often get to explore such complexities. David Fincher is practically single-handedly bringing back the complex female lead. He did it without any fanfare with Panic Room, Benjamin Button and Alien 3. He did it amid much fanfare with the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo and he’s outdone it here, with Amy Dunne and Gone Girl. Would that more directors had that kind of faith in what women can do and who they can be.
The brilliant Rosamund Pike joins Julianne Moore, who is currently in the number one spot for Still Alice, where she plays a woman suffering from Alzheimer’s. Also very much in the race is Hilary Swank for The Homesman, Jessica Chastain in Eleanor Rigby and Reese Witherspoon for Wild, three equally complex and well-written female leads for whom entire films were built around them. These three make up the core of the Best Actress race so far, though more performances are coming.
You can tell the state of American film when you compare the number of Best Actress contenders to Supporting Actress contenders. Since almost all of the movies in the Oscar race are about men, women exist only as a support to those men. In some instances, those supporting characters come to full, breathing life — like Patricia Arquette in Boyhood, like Viola Davis in Eleanor Rigby, like Keira Knightley in The Imitation Game. In American films, men do the important things, almost exclusively. So much so that if you have a daughter you’d be better off having her watch television where women are shown doing important things, not just helping the men do important things.
No one really saw Rosamund Pike coming [an addendum to appease readers of this site who apparently need an explanation – perhaps pundits predicted her but I don’t believe anyone ever realized how deep and dark she would be willing to go for this role – that kind of dedication is surprising in an actress who has not really yet earned her chops]. No one could have figured that this mild mannered actress could pull off such a strangely complicated, childish and monstrous character in the uniquely American tradition of unforgettable femme fatales.
Also in contention in the Best Actress category:
Shailene Woodly in The Fault in Our Stars
Felicity Jones in The Theory of Everything
Marion Cotillard in Two Days, One Night
Mia Wasikowska in Tracks
And coming up:
Amy Adams in Big Eyes
Meryl Streep in Into the Woods
It’s a sad day in Hollywood when the list of female leads up for contention in the Best Actress is this short. I don’t even know what to say anymore except we continue to be grateful to those precious few directors, David Fincher at the top of that list, who seem to give a good goddamn.
Next time to you come to a realization that you’re reading something you don’t want to read, here’s what you should do: Stop reading.
And I’m done. Do I wanna find out shit about what happens in Gone Girl before I see it tomorrow? Fuck no. Did I read a single sentence of this article? Fuck no. Will I read the whole thing after I’ve seen the film? Fuck yes.
I didn’t really appreciate that the post ended up being this overly revealing description of Rosamund Pike’s character rather than a dissection of Pike’s technical skills or a list of the reasons why this performance stands out in this year’s Best Actress race.
Alfred Eisen,
Next time to you come to a realization that you’re reading something you don’t want to read, here’s what you should do: Stop reading.
The further I got into your 1000-word comment the more I could see that you planned to use Sasha’s site as a soapbox where you could stand with a bullhorn and attack the person whose site made it possible for you to have an audience for your lecture.
We don’t go for that. If you want to lecture me or Sasha, you can write us an email. I read you comment; maybe Sasha will too. But you shouldn’t waste any more of your time psychoanalyzing us. We have a team of distinguished therapists studying us already and you’re infringing on their research.
Our readers are here to talk about movies. Not to listen to a stranger who wants to wander in and preach to us.
And one more thing. Assholes get their comments deleted?
If assholes always got their comments deleted, a lot of own comments would be deleted.
(Fact is, I delete more of my own comments than any comments ever left by anyone else. Sasha will confirm that’s true. I have thoughts and then I have second thoughts. I edit myself and delete things I’ve written every day. Any time any of you has second thoughts about anything you’ve posted and want to change, you can always email me and I’ll help you adjust it — typo, factual error, tone adjustment, whatever. Many of you already know how this works. I like to think it works well.)
Alfred Eisen, if we feel that anyone is being a deliberate bully, we will try to make sure that nobody on this site has to endure a personal attack.
So it’s ok to be an asshole, it’s ok to express yourself in strong or strident terms. But we try to draw the line on people who get off of coming to a site and lashing out with personal attacks directed at our writers or readers.
I have a lot of patience for this. I’ll try to work with you if you want to understand what kind of thing is acceptable debate and what kind of thing crosses the line into insult.
If you think you can come around and throw hurtful insults at AD staff or AD readers, you’re wrong.
Thanks for the feedback, Patrick. I think it’s possible that Viola could get a nomination, based on the fact that she is a real “it” woman right now. She’s uniformly terrific. May sound evil of me, but I want these Lead Actress competitors to fall away movie by movie. Pike would seem the biggest threat to Julianne right now, and have you noticed that the 3 biggest Oscar sites have Julianne in the #1 position right now, I hope it’s like last year and that that never changes a la Blanchett.
Here is the only thing I know about the Best Actress category: You can scratch Jessica Chastain off that list! I just got back from seeing the Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby and there is no way, in my opinion, she gets nominated for the lead actress category. First of all it doesn’t help that the movie just wasn’t that good. It was very choppy with no type of flow (mainly the fault of the director). I felt like there wasn’t much substance to either her or James McAvoys characters which is saying something considering they had been through a major tragedy in their lives (which I would love to go in detail about but quite honestly the audience never finds out HOW that happened!) In my opinion, the best two parts in the movie were from both Viola Davis and William Hurt but they were each only in the movie a total of about 15-20 minutes. Davis MAY have a shot at the Best Supporting Actress category if the Academy feels like she was in the movie long enough. She obviously was nominated for much less time in her first nomination with Doubt so there may be a glimmer of hope.
As for any of the others who have been mentioned, I obviously don’t have an opinion on them yet considering I haven’t had a chance to see any of the other films. I will say that of the movies I have been able to see so far this year I am surprised that Angelina Jolie has dropped off the map with her performance in Maleificant. I thought she was absolutely brilliant in that role and I would love to see her get a nomination for it.
Bryce, can you say more?? I’ve seen many of the clips, I think it’s weird that they’re making it Globe Eligible this year but Oscars Eligible next year. That won’t fly. Julianne could win the Globe though. Or Rosamund. They do like their young babes, don’t they. As an aside, I met Julianne on the street in the W Village in April, and she was absolutely lovely, and gave me 5 mins of her time and 2 pics. She’s my gal!!!!!
@RyanAdams lolll ya I’m just senseless. Why does it matter that my comments reveal so much if you think people should just deal if they come across some un-labeled spoilers? Also, this post didn’t come with a spoilers warning. I believe people should put spoiler warnings as a courtesy to the understandably curious readers who are excited about something and want to get a little hint of it before it comes out. But you’re right, those curious readers are stupid for their curiosity and deserve to have the plot of movies ruined for them.
But it’s funny because none of this actually matters.
Why does it matter that my comments reveal so much…
@ Alfed Eisen, Because when you unpack the thought process that leads you from clues you glean to your own speculation then it’s like Hercule Poirot or Miss Marple explaining the significance of hints that slip past many people unnoticed.
We could put spoiler warnings at the top of every damn thing we ever post at AD, but that would probably discourage people from reading about any movie at all — and in fact that’s the way people used to go see movies in the 1930s, 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s, before TV and the internet and even movie trailers began to telegraph everything in advance.
We use as much discretion as we think we need, and try to be as careful as reasonably possible. Sometimes we slip up on the main page and sometimes readers slip up in the comments. We do work hard around here to help keep details veiled that should be veiled.
But if someone doesn’t want to risk finding out too much about a movie that they know is packed with twists, then I don’t know why that person thinks it’s perfectly safe to dive into deep discussions of that movie.
Re: MAPS shouldn’t be read as satire, I agree with Ryan. Possibly the best film of the year that is the farthest away from the Oscar race, in more ways than one (so far)
Well, you know she won’t win……for another 20 years, But, yeah, AMPAS is her crowd. I called her win over Viola when everyone else screamed Davis. Never underestimate her,
I think people are REALLY underestimating Meryl in Into the Woods.
She’ll likely get the GG Comedy/Musical nom.
She may get a SAG nom; they love Musicals and they love her.
I’m sure she’ll be (at least) good in the iconic Broadway role.
It’s Meryl. AMPAS loves her, as well.
She defintiely is in the mix, bigtime.
Ryan, I got caught up in my own frustration. Thank you for correcting all that. You and Sasha are sharp knives 🙂
Thanks for your tolerance, Kane. This is a hard movie to write about vaguely and say anything meaningful! I’ll be glad when we’ve all seen it and can speak freely.
hey Paul, I understand your frustration, but but let’s all try not to draw any more attention to things that we know run the risk of ruining the movie for some people.
I appreciate you pointing out various hints that might give away too much, but when we discuss those things explicitly in open forum then we’re spotlighting the problems instead of keeping them lowkey.
Sasha and I don’t agree on how much to withhold, but I’m not going to slash any more of her words. She made a choice; I’m not going to override that choice, alright?
I do agree, if there are people who don’t want to know a single thing about Gone Girl then they should stop reading posts about Gone Girl.
Thank you for your advice. Advice which I hope you agree is best to delete. Let’s please drop it now?
Alfred Eisen,
I’ll say it again. Anyone who doesn’t want to know anything about the plot for Gone Girl should stop roaming around the internet reading whatever they can find to learn more about Gone Girl.
I didn’t read the book until July. Before I read it, I didn’t browse reviews at Amazon to see what people thought of it. I know better. Not because I’m a genius. Just because I have common sense.
Your comments got canned because you give away more with your speculation than you claim to want to conceal.
Thanks Ryan, Maybe I’m too smart for my own good or something? I thought the article spoke for itself. Best left that way. What do you think of Julianne’s chances?? It’s still early, I know……
Paul, What do I think of Julianne’s chances? She’s amazing in Maps to the Stars but I honestly don’t see that movie getting anywhere near the Oscars. It’s nothing like any Best Actress role that’s ever been nominated. The movie is beyond satire; it’s a farce. I doubt if half the Academy members would watch 20 minutes of it.
Still Alice? Now that sounds more in line with the type of role that the Oscars go for. I haven’t see it, and barely know anything about it. But the co-directors co-wrote and co-directed a movie several years ago called Quinceañera that was tender, funny, warm, lovely and honest. Those are important elements! Fingers crossed!
Kane and Paul, the more the two of you parse terminology about how to keep things blurry, the sharper you bring things into focus for casual readers who might be browsing around. So if it’s ok with you, I think we’ll remove all 7 of your brief comments, alright?
Paul, your original comment is so tightly worded, anyone who reads things at a glance will take in the SPOILER WARNING and the spoiler itself in the same block of text. So it’s better if we rephrase you altogether. I’ll see what I can do.
You make a good point Paul, so please make the same point again next month when more of the readers will already know what you’re talking about.
yes, we’ll change that one word in Sasha’s review too.
I think Pike will be the runner up, Films like GG don’t typically win acting Oscars. EW spoiled it, so I don’t feel so bad saying it here, but neither do characters like Amy Dunne. Besides, it’s Pike that has next year, the year after than, and the one after that. Julianne has paid her dues and is probably the most respected actress currently in Hollywood not to have an Oscar. Her tapestry of fine work will only help to push her over the top.
K. Bowen. I’ve heard from reliable sources that JM’s performance is one of her most nuanced and brilliant to date. The nomination is a lock; that I can promise you. The win, more likely than not in this field.
Sight unseen, I would guess:
Pike, Witherspoon, Woodley,1 of the Interstellar actresses, Adams if Big Eyes is reasonably successful, Jones otherwise.
The whole Moore thing feels more like an Internet outpouring of sympathy than a real campaign to me. She’ll have next year.
Julanne should have this—easily . She is soooooo overdue it’s unreal.
Ryan (and Steve): I did have a very strong reaction to Boyhood, and I can think of no American director who deserves the Academy’s recognition more than Linklater, so I WILL feel agonized if the Academy doesn’t nominate him for direction, just to pick out one category where I badly want the film to succeed.
But I have to say, most years I invest more feeling in the films I DON’T want to see succeed than rooting for the ones I like. Which is stupid, but that’s life.
This was the review of Gone Girl I was most looking forward to. Smartly written and analyzed, Sasha. I’m so glad that you like the ending, because it’s probably my favorite part of the book.
“…for the first time in a long time I don’t feel any particular strong emotional bond to any of the contenders…”
That’s a relief to know I’m not the only one – I thought there was something wrong with me or that I was losing a lifelong interest. I’m sure it will pick-up.
I should clarify about Amy Adams. I loved her performance in American Hustle. Fierce, sexy, and confident-just like the movie.
That being said, I am also bummed that Emma Thompson missed out on a nomination. She should have taken Streep’s spot.
Bryce
Guilty. What can I say I simply cannot get on the David O. Russell bandwagon.
“Yes, Amy Adams is awesome. I just don’t agree with her most recent nomination, that’s all.”
Me either. She was Supporting! But I know what you’re getting at is that you didn’t like the movie. Oh well :p
Robert A.
I read somewhere – Deadline, I think – that Focus will campaign Felicity Jones in supporting, but good call, she should be definitely a contender SOMEWHERE, for a young, still-slightly-under-the-radar actress she sure is building one hell of a CV and a first nod is just a matter of time now.
m1
Yes, Amy Adams is awesome. I just don’t agree with her most recent nomination, that’s all.
“And this is a conversation we’ll have to back burner until you can actually see the film.”
Right. Because you never contribute to the conversation until you’ve seen a film. Honestly, Sasha, you’re over the top on this one and the foul language, condescension and defensiveness in your replies hints toward an admission that this post is as problematic as I suggest.
I’ll be sorry if Marion Cotillard is overlooked by the Academy again this year. She was the only thing I liked in “Midnight in Paris”(2011) But , boy, was she great in it. A supporting nomination was definitely in order. And I was shocked when that staggering performance of hers in “Rust and Bone”(2012) wasn’t even nominated. It should have won. Now, this year, she’s been marvelous twice. “The Immigrant” has its problems but Cotillard’s contribution is sublime. And, as for “Two Days, One Night”, which I saw at TIFF this month, it’s a terrific movie – with Marion Cotillard subtly detailed and quietly devastating. Definitely Oscar worthy.
My 2005 top 20 is weak I know, some important films still to be seen. For now:
1. Brokeback Mountain
2. Cache
3. Mysterious Skin
4. The Proposition
5. A History of Violence
6. The New World
7. Capote
8. Batman Begins
9. Black
10. Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
11. Corpse Bride
12. Paheli
13. A Bittersweet Life
14. Match Point
15. Sin City
16. Water
17. Maine Gandhi Ko Nahi Mara
18. Munich
19. Hazaaron Khwaishein Aisi
20. Serenity
2005 was a weak year for film in my opinion. Admittedly, I haven’t seen 11 of Bryce’s top 20, and 1 of those (Lazarescu) is a film I count towards 2006, but my view of 2005 is that there were several good-to-great movies, but compared to 2007 the lack of classics is palpable.
And yes, MUNICH should’ve fucking won Best Picture.
1. Munich
2. Grizzly Man
3. Match Point
4. Hustle & Flow
5. A History Of Violence
6. Brokeback Mountain
7. Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
8. Cache
9. Capote
10. Good Night And Good Luck
11. The 40 Year Old Virgin
12. Brick
13. Kung Fu Hustle
14. The Squid And The Whale
15. Batman Begins
16. King Kong
17. Cinderella Man
18. Sin City
19. Wedding Crashers
20. Jarhead
“I firmly believe these five nominations may have turned her into someone SLIGHTLY overrated”
No, they haven’t. She’s still as awesome as she ever was.
On Phantom’s list, take out Shailene Woodley (I’m not convinced she’s a serious threat for a nomination, although I could be wrong) and plug in Felicity Jones for The Theory of Everything, and I agree that’s the most likely Top 7.
And anyone who is saying that Julianne Moore is a lock for the win is being very premature. A lock? As in, no question she will win. None? I disagree with that. I’m ecstatic that she’s back in the Oscar race and I do think you can make a strong case for her to win. She’s in my #1 position at the moment as well, but to call her a lock for the win is…well, hasty!
Andre, not always remember UPSTREAM COLOR 🙁 …. :)!
Now to everyone,
I don’t think you need me to remind you that Julianne Moore is fucking owed an Academy Award ever since VANYA ON 42ND STREET so get with the program!
Well if we get one movie a decade where “the female” is the smartest character in the movie well then that movie is upon us and it’s Into the Woods. And it’s not just one character, it’s three. Yes, I would venture to say the three smartest characters in Into the Woods are all women. And it may be even more than that!
Also, I’m so so so excited for this movie, and this article makes me even more excited.
I think you’ve kind of equated being smart with being a bitch, not that it was necessarily your intention. Amy is smart, and Amy is a bitch, but they are not one in the same. That is dangerous thinking. I’m thinking about this particular passage:
“Maybe we get one movie a decade at most where the female is the smartest character in the whole movie. Women strive to be good more than anything else. Good mothers, good wives, good fucks, good kissers, good looking, good little girls. But, as the line goes, “Sometimes you have to be a high-riding bitch, Dolores. Sometimes being a bitch is all a woman has to hold on to.” “
That is dangerous thinking. I’m thinking about this particular passage: “Sometimes you have to be a high-riding bitch to survive. Sometimes being a bitch is all a woman has to hold onto.”
― Stephen King, Dolores Claiborne
Down to SEVEN ?
1. JULIANNE MOORE – She is having a fantastic year and no, not just for an actress her age, for an actress of ANY age : she started the year with an early hit (Non-Stop), she continued with the Cannes victory that made her the first American actress to complete the trifecta (she had won Best Actress in Berlin (The Hours) and Venice (Far From Heaven) already), then came the (semi-)surprise festival hit that will garner her her long-awaited fifth nomination (Still Alice) and of course the biggest exposure of her career (Mockingjay) is only a few weeks away (BTW, perfect timing Oscar-wise). There IS a chance that this overdue year of hers will be more Albert Nobbs (long overdue but still only a nod for Glenn Close and still no win) than Dead Man Walking (Sarandon won after losing four times), so I guess it will come down to A) how willing she AND the distributor will be to pull out all the stops for the campaign B) could the film gain traction in any other categories ? and C) if she makes the cut with Maps to the Stars in supporting, could she cancel herself out AGAIN like she did in 2002 ? . Based on precedent, at least another nod (picture, adapted screenplay, supporting actress are in the mix) will be needed for her to go all the way but then again if there is a contender in this race this year who can overrule precedent and win, it’s her. P.S. If she still doesn’t win this year, she SO will for Freeheld next year. Now THAT has monsterpiafhours written all over it.
2. ROSAMUND PIKE – It was about DAMN time she got a worthy lead role, and boy, could she have NOT done better than Amazing Amy ? I am so glad the reviews are raves, I loved the book, I love her work and I…well, I have tickets for next Tuesday so I can’t say much more til then. For what it’s worth, I think the fact that she is a beautiful actress with obvious leading lady potential who also happens to be one of the best character actresses today (Pride & Prejudice, An Education, Barney’s Version, Made in Dagenham), will help her narrative a lot…so will the hopefully excellent Box Office, the Fincher-clout and the bigstudiocampaignmoney.
3. SHAILENE WOODLEY – I think we are underestimating her and feminism-controversy or not, we shouldn’t. Sure, her comments were questionable (=embarassing, laughable, ignorant, annoying) but still, the fact is that – again, based on precedent – she has everything a strong acting contender could ask for : she has been on the awards circuit before and came very close to a nomination recently enough that most voters still remember it, she has serious indie cred after receiving two Indie Spirit nominations for two remarkably well-received films (The Descendants, The Spectacular Now), she has that ‘humble acting beginnings’ angle, as well (from an ABC Family show to Oscar ? now THAT is a Cinderella story the press has a thing for) and on top of all this, she started a successful franchise this year (only one other young actress could do that before her and she won an Oscar not long after) AND her Oscar-performance this year is not only obvious awards-magnet material (terminally ill teen in love) it is in a critically acclaimed, cult-bound film that also happens to be an international smash hit (300M worldwide on a 12M budget). Long story short, her team has A LOT to work with and expecting them to NOT work all these winning angles, wouldn’t make sense from our part.
4. AMY ADAMS – First off, let me just say that I love Amy Adams, I love how she does it all (indie/studio/tentpole, drama/comedy, lead/supporting) and I love how she doesn’t make a big deal about it she just does the good work and basically that’s it. Having said that, I firmly believe these five nominations may have turned her into someone SLIGHTLY overrated (the American Hustle nod did her in IMO, I still don’t think she should have gotten in especially not over fierce competition from the likes of Emma Thompson), so in order for her to win this year, I think she not only needs the usual (critical support and at least a small campaign), she will need the film to do well (nods in main categories (and the Academy rarely gets Tim Burton) + at least decent Box Office), she will need extreme campaign muscle (well, he has Weinstein for that). IMO, if she doesn’t have those, there is no way in hell she can get ahead of ‘that other overdue redhead’.
5. REESE WITHERSPOON – After her squeaky-clean image suffered an unexpected blow recently (one that is irrelevant now and I only mention it because the contrast is great) she is not only back, she is back with a bang…and a creative comeback she had been long-overdue for considering her great early work (Election). So her big bid this year seems to be Wild, and it could work out, no doubt, especially because she obviously decided to work the circuit that should help a lot in the long run but what may also tip the scale in her favour, is the great year she’s having : Wild will be an art house hit at least, The Good Lie could be a BIG sleeper moneymaker , and a great supporting role in the edgy Inherent Vice will cement her comeback-status, as well. The only thing that may prevent her from receiving her second lead Oscar nomination is if her supporting work in Inherent Vice overshadows her lead performances. That COULD happen…that performance is directed by Paul Thomas Anderson after all.
6. JESSICA CHASTAIN – I think releasing ‘Them’ first was a mistake, it seems to be the shortened, ‘dumbed down’ version of what otherwise felt like an exceptionally well-received edgy piece (the 3-hour-long ‘Him & Her), and now the oh-so-crucial first impression voters may put the emphasis on will be the ‘meh’ the short version got from critics (58 Metacritic). Still, when the original cut is released, the film AND Chastain could regain some of that early traction especially with Harvey Weinstein behind the Oscar campaign (although he has Amy Adams in the race, too). Now that we know Miss Julie won’t be a factor (won’t be released this year) AND that Chastain will be campaigned in supporting for Interstellar, she STILL has a Jolly Joker to play : if A Most Violent Year turns out to be a late critical hit (it should be, AFI rarely misses), Chastain could probably qualify with that in either actress categories depending on which one is stronger and in which is she already a strong contender with another film.
7. MERYL STREEP – Say what you will about August : Osage County, I firmly believe she deserved the nomination and considering the source material and the flashy nature of this part, I won’t be surprised at all if she makes the cut once again. Having said that, the usual streepian category confusion is here again (=the role may have been supporting on paper but not on screen in her hands), so in the end she may just end up in supporting…though we always say that and she never does (August:Osage County, Julie & Julia, The Devil Wears Prada etc.)
For Actress in a Leading Role we already have three Locks and a Lock for the win!
1. Julianne Moore “Still Alice” (Winner)
2. Rosamund Pike “Gone Girl”
3. Reese Witherspoon “Wild”
4. ?
5. ?
For the last two Spots we have:
Felicity Jones “The Theory of Everything”
Jessica Chastain “A Most Violent Year” / “The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby”
Marion Cotillard “Two Days, One Night”
Amy Adams “Big Eyes”
Meryl Streep “Into the Woods” (If she will go Lead)
Hilary Swank “The Homesman”
Shailene Woodley “The Fault in our Stars”
No David and I think you asked me that last year.
Kane
Are you the wwe wrestler Kane???
Everyone seems to have beaten me to it but I’ll say it, about everyone on this site that reads and comments frequently have been saying Pike is going to be a serious contender. I’ve said it even though I never read the book. I have that much faith in Pike, who I’ve always felt is a strong actress, Fincher and especially the trailer that came out.
somehow I KNEW Bryce would have voted for the same film as me 😛
bffs! hahahahaha
K. Bowen, that sex-massacre scene is definitely one of the biggest WTF-moments on Spielberg’s career. It’s a… “really?”
Having said that, Munich would’ve been a fine BP winner. I can’t believe that it’s still not available on Blu-ray, but I guess they’ll release a 10th Anniversary Edition next year.
Sasha, you talk about doing your homework, and yeah, I agree, people have to do their homework. Anyone who has read Gone Girl knew that Rosamund Pike was a contender sight unseen. The role (if like anything portrayed in the book) is just too juicy. And Fincher (even though we disagree on his greatness) is too good of a director to miscast that role. When we read about the screen tests and auditions he puts his casts through, you knew and I knew that she had the goods for her performance to be nomination-worthy.
What’s scary is that the other people didn’t. If it’s their profession to follow the Oscars than they should be doing their homework, and if that means learning source material for the “Big Films” then that’s what they need to do. That it appears they don’t do this is almost malpractice when it comes to predicting the Oscar Favorites sight unseen.
And to bring it back to Into the Woods. I find it pretty much ridiculous that not everyone in the Oscar Predicting business doesn’t have the film on their short lists. I mean, the show has been available to see on Netflix until very recently. Anyone who takes the 2.5 hours to watch it knows that it’s not your typical musical nor your typical fantasy film. To me, it’s obvious it wll get a bunch of nominations and most of the big ones. When people predict Unbroken as number one, that’s a huge leap of faith. Jolie, who has one film of mixed to good reviews, does not have the track record to merit that consideration. Yes, the material is very baity, but Jolie is too unproven.
But then, I saw it coming months upon months ahead of time that 12 Years a Slave was going to score big at Oscar-time. One just has to be familiar with the director and the source material and use some intelligence in deciding if it’s a good fit or not. Oh, yeah, I also pegged Hugo/Scorcese the year before based on the quality of the book and thinking how Scorcese would approach the material. Again, if you do your research, it’s not that hard to pick one or two surefire nominees before you see them.
————-
For the record, Titanic was long-considered to be in danger of becoming one of the huge cinematic failures of all time, along the lines of Heaven’s Gate and Ishtar. It wasn’t until the day it opened and the public instantly fell in love with it did the perception of that film change. So, yes, everyone though LA Confidential was going to win. No one even considered Titanic as a possibility until weeks after it opened and became a phenomenon.
Awardswatch Forums had Pike for the win since forever. Now they have her only for nomination cause supposedly Affleck praise is stealing her thunder. or something. Point is, she isn’t crashing anyone’s party, she has been party queen since the movie was announced. Some semi left fielder such as Woodley in Fault In Our Stars or KStew in Camp X Ray would be the party crasher (cause nobody seriously predicted them due to YA/too indie movie).
Either way, well deserved. Pike’s been building a strong resume for years and is breaking out at the right time. Not overnight not too late.
Munich’s problem is that it becomes repetitive in the second hour and that horrible sex-massacre scene. I get the point it was trying to make. But it was thoughtless and horribly distasteful.
Hard Science: Guys, guys, here’s how the ’05 best picture nominees stacked up against the cinematic year in general. A year so strong I’m not sure how The Academy didn’t collapse when they chose CRASH. I hadn’t come out to my family yet so that year I avoided the ceremony because the prospect of my parents -who would have joined me had it been on- seeing people talk about BROKEBACK on television was too uncomfortable for me to bear. I was a very young fool!
1. A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, David Cronenberg
2. CACHE, Michel Haneke
3. ME AND YOU AND EVERYONE WE KNOW, Miranda July
4. THE NEW WORLD, Terrence Malick
5. THE CHILD, Jean-Pierre & Luc Dardenne
6. THE THREE BURIALS OF MELQUIADES ESTRADA, Tommy Lee Jones
7. SIN CITY, Robert Rodriguez, Frank Miller
8. THE DEATH OF MR. LAZARESCU, Cristi Puiu
9. JUNEBUG, Phil Morrison
10. BRICK, Rian Johnson
11. CAPOTE, Bennet Miller
12. BATMAN BEGINS, Christopher Nolan
13. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN, Ang Lee
14. A BITTERSWEET LIFE, Kim Jee-woon
15. C.R.A.Z.Y., Jean-Marc Vallee
16. THE BEAT THAT MY HEART SKIPPED, Jaques Audiard
17. THE BOW, Ki-duk Kim
18. MUNICH, Steven Spielberg
19. HEIGHTS, Chris Terrio
20. THREE TIMES, Hou Hsiao-Hsien
As far as best of 2005, I’m partial to King Kong myself.
Munich was better than Grizzly Man or The New World or Domino? Nah.
I’d still go with Capote for 2005. Or Good Night and Good Luck.
“But it’s nice to see you back trolling the site. Can’t you find another sandbox to play in?”
Trolling? I presented arguments based on observation for discussion and debate’s sake, which I thought was the point. Don’t worry, I’ll find a friendlier “sandbox”.
Wow. I go do a bit of reading and make some dinner and further hell breaks loose. I always miss the fighting.
For the record, I never said we knew Pike would get in, I said we anticipated her getting in. Totally different. And as my post was not quoted I guess that takes me out of the firing line. Phew! Though I do love a good debate.
Too much Munich talk here.
How about…. BROKEBACK MOUNTAIN :'( That film wuz robbed.
I love your enthusiasm Sasha. Its great that Pike rules in the film. In the trailers her voice sounds so great and she definitely looks the part. Gone Girl is atm my 2nd most anticipated film and I can’t wait to see. About her Oscar chances, she was and still is in my top 5 over at GoldDerby. I wasn’t sure of her winning but she was basically a shoe in for many people. A good read as usual.
I’m going g to give a list of performances that have no chance at a best actress nomination, but deserves consideration. Because there’s no buzz surrounding the performance, or its a small independent movie that is distributed by a small no one has heard of distribution company:
1.Najarra Townsend ‘The Toy Soldiers’
2.Jenny Slate ‘Obvious Child’
3. Kristen Wiig ‘The Skeleton Twins’
4Constance Brennerman ‘The Toy Soldiers’
5.Zoe Kazan ‘The Pretty One’
6. Emma Roberts ‘Palo Alto’
“Unless you are one of those people who remember Munich as having won Best Picture.”
MUNICH *should* have won Best Picture. *kicks over chair*
MUNICH *should* have won Best Picture. *kicks over chair*
cheers. I’ve said the same thing 30 times on these pages.
MUNICH *should* have won Best Picture. *kicks over chair*
Well, sure. But they’re never going to be that cool!
MUNICH had some grey area mixed in with the black-and-white hand-holding. Lots of Oscar voters get confoosed by grey areas.
Ryan: If the Gurus know their game this year, at least we’ll have a GREAT winner, right? Boyhood for best pic. That would obliterate years of frustration…
Sasha: That’s simply not true. Pike has been on most contender lists for months. And now they are talking about her, because of you? Right. ‘Can’t you find another sandbox to play in’. Ever the friendly host…
Pike has been on most contender lists for months.
I am the one who has been watching and contributing and I had to talk people – like Kris, like Jeff into believing she was a strong contender. BUT even beyond that, nobody can KNOW until the film is seen. By “see her coming,” what I mean more than an Oscar nomination is just how dark and dirty she was willing to go for this role. But people can’t really reveal much of that without giving too much away.
And p.s. only half of the Gold Derby pundits currently have Pike listed in their Best Actress contenders. That ain’t everybody and that number has grown over the weeks. http://www.goldderby.com/awardshows/experts/oscars-2014-nominations-nominations/best-actress.html
Ryan: If the Gurus know their game this year, at least we’ll have a GREAT winner, right?
julian the emperor, yes, I’m expecting we’ll have seen 5 or 6 films rise to the top ranks of greatness by year’s end. If the Academy picks one of those, then we should have an honorable Best Picture winner.
This year feels unusual for me because for the first time in a long time I don’t feel any particular strong emotional bond to any of the contenders — yet. It’s a good feeling. (in other words, my numb lack of feeling feels better than feeling agonized.)
Jesse – you beat me to it.
Fincher may not be Cukor or Haynes, but he always gets perfect – not just good -performances from his female actors. Given his rep with relative newbies like Mara and, apparently, Pike, he’s a damn Henry Higgins. Shame he wasn’t able to stay on Cleopatra because I’d love to see what he could do with Jolie in that role.
My ranking of Fincher (Bryce, always ready with a list!):
1. Fight Club
2. The Social Network
3. Se7en
4. Zodiac
5. Panic Room
6. The Game
7. Gone Girl
8. The Curious Case of Benjamin Button
9. The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo
10. Alien 3
Listing them, I notice that had Fincher not made any of the top 4-ranked movies here, he would have been just an ordinary guy (or rather, a very talented guy doing movies somehow lacking in scope and vision)… but he did do those four movies, and what movies they are!:)
I agree with you on The Godfather, Ryan. That’s very true. And I agree with you about how prestige pics are often a lot less fun to watch than ‘pulp’ (whatever that is; maybe I should have avoided the term, because it’s too loaded…). And, yes, neither of us care much for the typical ‘great Oscar movie’, but we still care about the Oscar race, right? Otherwise we’re wasting our time here. I would love to see something like ‘Inside llewyn Davis’ or ‘Frances Ha’ or ‘Before Midnight’ in the BP lineup (to use last year as an example), rather those small movies than blockbuster adaptations. With ‘pulp’ (with regards to Fincher) I was merely pointing out the fact that these days he seems content to do genre adaptations with a good-to-great box office prospect. Since he doesn’t do anything personal with the material (even less so with this one than was the case with TGWtDT, where he did manage to kind of neuter all of the Scandinavian milieu from the original) and slavishly follows the book (I’m sorry if that’s a spoiler?), I think it IS unambitious. And, yes, I have noticed that a majority of critics disagree (and yes they get paid more than you and me, I only got the ticket for my review, so there you go…), and that is a surprise to me, granted, but still many of the positive review haven’t exactly been raving about ‘Gone Girl’ being in any way original or groundbreaking (least of all in the context of what Fincher has already achieved).
Oh, and I do like pulp. Pulp is good (and pulp is bad). Just like any other genre tag or era or style of cinema. I should have thought twice about using it in a derogatory sense.
but we still care about the Oscar race, right? Otherwise we’re wasting our time here.
*sigh* I’m just in a mood today. Sometimes I think I care about the Oscars the way I care about American politics: I think the whole system needs an overhaul if its ever to have any relevance or credibility. I care about the Oscars from the perspective of wishing there were more people who wanted to reform the Oscars and restore them to their former (elusive? illusory? imaginary?) respectability.
it’s a depressing state of affairs when we all mostly agree that there’s barely any connection between Best Picture nominees and the best movies of any given year.
A stopped clock that’s right twice every 10 years or so.
One thing you won’t find from me is any typical Oscar huckstering. Homey don’t play dat.
Time to rank Fincher, again? If you insist!
“Great!”
1. SE7EN
2. FIGHT CLUB
3. ZODIAC
4. THE SOCIAL NETWORK
“Pretty goddamn awesome!”
5. THE GAME
“Astounding showcase of his technique. Fun!”
6. PANIC ROOM
“Don’t particularly care for, but not without a few interesting elements!”
7. THE GIRL WITH THE DRAGON TATTOO
8. THE CURIOUS CASE OF BENJAMIN BUTTON
“He directed it!”
9. ALIEN3
Ryan, I suppose the concern I have which may not have been clear is that because of the headline this post coming from a respected Oscar blogger seems like Sasha, who never fails to remind us that Oscar bloggers have great influence over the race especially right now, is trying to shove Rosamund into the Best Actress conversation without providing any defense for it aside from the fact that she may have been well suited for the “iconic” role of the blonde Amy Dunne simply because Rosamund is blonde herself. If the POV of this site is that it is one of many critics that truly determines what films/across will or will not be a factor at the Oscars then I don’t think I’m out of line challenging y’all to be more responsible and objective with your assessments of films and performances.
Sasha makes a great case for hw Fincher is an important director in the fight for more women-centered films and even why Amy Dunne is great material for an actress to sink their teeth into, but headlining this post with as bold a statement as Rosamund Pike is the best performance of the year requires a little more defense.
headlining this post with as bold a statement as Rosamund Pike is the best performance of the year requires a little more defense.
With respect, You might be reading something more emphatic than what was written. I see “one of the best”
“But I’m still conscious of the fact that, for the most part, his movies are entirely populated by men.”
When Fincher does center on a woman, he gets terrific performances from some of the most talented actresses of their generations. Blanchett, Mara &, apparently, Pike. Scorsese predominantly focuses on men. He also directed a flick that had Lorraine Bracco holding Liotta’s bloody gun and narrating “I had to admit, it turned me on,” one of the greatest brief expressions of a woman’s sexuality ever put on film. And he got Sharon Stone’s best performance, and Cathy Moriarty’s. Plus Oscars for Ellen Burstyn & Blanchett (there she is again) and a nomination for a, what, 12-year-old Jodie Foster.
Fincher’s a guy with an attraction to dark, often violent subjects. He isn’t a writer, thus making him relatively beholden to the properties of others. Most of the hot R-rated original scripts and adaptations focus on men. DRAGON TATTOO didn’t and he delivered a riveting movie that shot Rooney Mara onto the screen in one of the breakout performances of the decade. GONE GIRL was written by and centered, in part, on a woman. And he took it on and has, by most accounts, produced something riveting.
Wow, the post should be renamed “Some Bullshit Crashes A Perfectly Legitimate Viewpoint Of The Best Actress Race With Some Of The Stupidest Comments Ever”.
Did I mention anything about what I would rather see than Fincher-by-the-numbers? ‘Stuff that happened in history’? That’s hardly my idea of a great Oscar movie. ‘Topical current events’? Sounds boring.
But wait and see for yourself, Ryan (I’m curious, btw, as to why it was screened over here prior to the US?). Fincher adds nothing of value to either the book, the genre or his own oeuvre. It’s just a wildly unambitious movie. That’s the kind of stuff I don’t want to see at the Oscars (though, of course, I’m fully aware that the annual roster is full of precisely that kind of movies)
It’s just a wildly unambitious movie.
this dismissal is at odds with the assessment of many critics who get paid a lot more to assess movies than either of us get paid, julian the emperor.
“That’s hardly my idea of a great Oscar movie.”
I guess my point is that I know my own personal list of great movies is pretty much devoid of typical “great Oscar movies.” You know me well enough to understand that I care fuck-all about most movies that fit the typical mold of “great Oscar movies.” “Great Best Picture Winner” is the saddest oxymoron I know.
If you saw my list of favorite movies of the 1940s and 1950s, you’d be appalled at how many are “pulp.” Oscar History would look so much better if it included more movies adapted from sources scorned for being pulp. It would look more fun and it would look more intelligent.
But I’m with you in regard to this bewilderment: I have no idea what goes on in the heads of distributors who play peek-a-boo with release dates.
Pulp? The Godfather is one of the pulpiest airport novels ever written.
I never stated he didn’t give a damn. But I fail to see how he has an active interest in creating great roles for women. Alien 3? He regrets that movie. And that was 20 years ago. Panic Room? 13 years ago. Sure, his last two movies now have one central part for one woman. His movies have been criticized for excluding women in the past. Surely this can’t be news to you. You guys love Fincher and will defend everything he does. I get it. I love his movies too. But I’m still conscious of the fact that, for the most part, his movies are entirely populated by men. Almodovar, Allen, Baumbach, O.Russell (even though I despise his movies). These directors have demonstrated time and time again that they give a damn.
“I never stated he didn’t give a damn.”
ok, I misread this sentence:
“Does Fincher really give a damn though?”
Sounded like one of those questions that isn’t really a question in the mind of the person asking it. I was only try to answer that question.
I don’t see how Swank is actually in contention. almost nobody besides Sasha thinks The Homesman is going anywhere, awards-wise. Or probably box office wise, too.
I don’t see how Swank is actually in contention. almost nobody besides Sasha thinks The Homesman is going anywhere, awards-wise. Or probably box office wise, too.
Why do you bother commenting if you don’t do your homework? Or rather, to quote Glengarry Glen Ross – don’t open your mouth unless you know the shot. Go check out the Best Actress list over at Gold Derby and get back to me. I’m not here to teach remedial Oscar watching.
I don’t even think Moore should be considered a lock for a nomination. The problem with Still Alice is that it’s apparently not a great film outside of Moore’s performance, and it’s a small film, likely to be overlooked. On top of that, Moore has gone so long without a nomination–even in 2010 when she probably should have gotten in easily (category confusion might have hurt her, yes, but did anyone really think Nicole Kidman had a shot at winning for Rabbit Hole?). So I really wouldn’t pin my hopes on her at all.
Pike has been a contender from the outset of the season. Nothing new there. She’s the best thing about the movie, btw. But I remain a sceptic when it comes to the Oscar prospects of this one: Does the Academy really feel the urge to award a pulp movie like this? When Fincher gets back to doing proper work they should want to honor him, but for this? Furthermore, he’s adding absolutely nothing to the book (which I just happened to finish yesterday out of pure curiosity). Damn, I miss his old ambition and boldness of vision!
With regards to Pike: Rooney Mara managed a nomination for Dragon Tattoo (which, frankly, is still something of a puzzle to me), but she was more of an ‘it girl’ at the time than Pike is now. It is (another) weak year in the category, so she might get in, and make no mistake, I do think she merits recognition, but the movie itself should be nowhere near the Oscars.
Does the Academy really feel the urge to award a pulp movie like this?
Agreed! Unless a filmmaker makes movies about Kings and Queens and Repulsive Prime Ministers then why are we even bothering with their commonplace unroyal asses? Unless the character did something heroic and/or tragic in WWII then she has no business trying to show up in the Oscar discussion.
…the movie itself should be nowhere near the Oscars.
yes, the Oscars are only for movies about topical current events and stuff that happened in history.
Christ.
Does Fincher really give a damn though? Fight Club, The Social Network, Zodiac, The Game, Seven. I didn’t remember seeing any leading parts for women in those. He is by no means a women’s director. It’s 50/50 at best. It seems you’ve deliberately chosen to look over half of his filmography to make a point that’s just not there.
“No one really saw Rosamund Pike coming”? Every single Oscar watcher saw her coming. She’s been predicted as a nominee for months.
gee, knee play, you’re right. Fincher doesn’t give a damn about women because he fails to have his entire career revolve exclusively around women.
move over, Bechdel Test. New litmus test: If you ever dare make a movie with a man in the lead then you clearly “don’t give a damn” about women.
“It’s 50/50 at best… It seems you’ve deliberately chosen to look over half of his filmography to make a point “
erm…
which half of his career are you deliberately choosing to overlook…?
“No one really saw Rosamund Pike coming”? Every single Oscar watcher saw her coming. She’s been predicted as a nominee for months.
Yeah, no. They listed her as a possible contender but no one had any idea how good she would be. Plus, they didn’t have her on their radar until I started talking about her performance. But it’s nice to see you back trolling the site. Can’t you find another sandbox to play in?
But it’s nice to see you back trolling the site. Can’t you find another sandbox to play in?
“Cross over children. All are welcome. All welcome. Go into the Light. There is peace and serenity in the Light.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=i4Dc-J_mD7c
— Tangina and I have a somewhat more lenient attitude toward lost souls. Big Tent Sandbox here, as far as I’m concerned. Neighborhood Watch always helps maintain the balance.
🙂
on the other hand, Tangina eventually and abruptly discovered what a fuckup she was, trying to embrace the dark side.
😕
@John Good point and that isn’t even counting the foreign actress and under the radar actress race.
I just saw Boyhood and if Patricia Arquette isn’t a lead I don’t know who is. I do know she’s being championed in support instead for some unknown reason.
…………….
Not to mention Cotillard or Dorval. The list goes on. They’re just not in Best Picture contenders. Therefore, the lead race is deemed weak. :/
tgig (thank god i’m gay)
Moore
Pike
Adams
Witherspoon (twice)
Jones
Streep
Chastain (twice)
Blunt
Mbatha-Raw
Hathaway
Woodley
The list goes on and on of very good or great performances.
Why do people say EVERY year that Best Actress race is weak compared to Lead Actor …………… because most of the Best Actor contender are in Best Picture-like films. End of story. And it’s that way every. single. year.
Look at this year:
Carrell – Foxcatcher
Keaton – Birdman
Cumberbatch – Imitation Game
Redmayne – Theory of Everything
Tatum – Foxcatcher
Spall – Mr. Turner
McConaughey – Interstellar
Affleck – Gone Girl
Isaac – A Most Violent Year
O’Connell – Unbroken
Olewoyo (sorry for spelling) – Selma
To me, the Lead Actress contenders (10-15 people deep), every year, are AS good or BETTER than the Lead Actor, but I feel like there’s a stigma against Lead Actresses who happen to not be performing in big Best Picture contending movies.
But, Ryan, if the headline is “Rosamund Pike Crashes the Best Actress Race with One of the Best Performances of the Year” and the first couple of paragraphs include references to her dramatic transformation and being iconic then I would expect more of a defense of these claims than a couple quips about Pike’s ability to reach beyond her statuesque beauty and much, MUCH less about who Amy Dunne is in favor of more about what Rosamund Pike does. Because if all Rosamund Pike had to do to be one of the most memorable blondes in film history is be blonde then….. well….. uh…..
Honestly Sasha’s making more of an argument for the casting director winning an Oscar than she is for Pike.
Because if all Rosamund Pike had to do to be one of the most memorable blondes in film history is be blonde then….. well….. uh…..
I wonder if any appraisals of Vivien Leigh ever bother with incidental mention of Scarlett O’Hara or Blanche DuBois. Or if Vivien Leigh’s iconic performances somehow manage to materialize out of thin air without being connected to any particular character.
Maybe we’re all just blown away by the hair color and accents of actresses, no matter what silly random role they happen to be playing. screenplay, schmeenplay.
Though I admit, Sandra Bullock won an Oscar for hairstyle and accent, I think that’s not one of Oscar’s proudest moments.
Benutty, I don’t want to get hung up on this point, which seems to verge on semantics, or worse, to verge on: “this post is not about what I wanted it to be about”
give us time. the movie hasn’t opened yet. right now, we’re treading lightly on spoiler territory, do you agree? the book exists and millions of people have already read it, so we can discuss the book and the characters in the book in the context of “artists who create significant female characters.”
we’ll be able to talk more about the specifics of the performance that give life to that character after we all have a chance to see it onscreen for ourselves.
speaking for myself, I don’t want anyone explain to me the details of the impact of a performance before I’m able to experience its impact on my own.
@Robin Thanks man. I forgot Keaton. I would add Waltz and Murray too.
I think this year is just weaker on leads period. Supporting and best director races will be the most fun to watch.
Julianne is winning the Oscar, not Rosamund, sorry.
@Angela
“Is the actor race any stronger? All I hear is Cumberbatch, Carell, and Redmayne.”
You must have heard Michael Keaton’s name. And Timothy Spall. I suspect you will be hearing and seeing the names David Oyelowo, Jack O’Connell, Joaquin Phoenix, and Matthew McConaughey very shortly too in this category. Ellar Coltrane is a long shot. We are still waiting to hear about whether Channing Tatum will be pushed for Actor or Supporting Actor too. Right now though, prepare for lots of talk about Ben Affleck.
Most of this rave for Rosamund Pike is actually a rave for the character of Amy Dunne. I’m failing to understand, aside from fitting a mold of a high-cheek-boned blonde, why you think Pike’s performance is already so “iconic.” Sasha, there’s no disrespecting the amount of space you give to the promotion of women in film because that’s a great cause to drum up support for, but you HAVE to leave it out of your prognosticating. As much as you write about the role that critics and Oscar bloggers have in the awards season you’d think you’d treat your own participation in it with a bit more justification and objectivity.
This post, and many of your recent ones, tries really hard to push your own agenda into the awards conversation rather than focusing on the actual performances of the films/actors.
Sasha, there’s no disrespecting the amount of space you give to the promotion of women in film because that’s a great cause to drum up support for, but
There are no great performances by women without great roles for women; nothing for an actress to sink her teeth into without a great female character for her to play. How is it hard to understand the connection?
Most of this rave for Rosamund Pike is actually a rave for the character of Amy Dunne. I’m failing to understand, aside from fitting a mold of a high-cheek-boned blonde, why you think Pike’s performance is already so “iconic.”
Pay attention, class. I can’t talk specifics about the performance without ruining it even more than I already have. To talk about it is to give away MAJOR spoilers, which I will do once people have the chance to see it. It is simply unfair to give it all away now. I had to speak in general terms. If you want specifics, pull your head out of your own ass – see how nice it to breathe clean air? And then go see the movie and then we’ll talk.
This post, and many of your recent ones, tries really hard to push your own agenda into the awards conversation rather than focusing on the actual performances of the films/actors.
That’s your warped perception of what I do and simply does not reflect the kind of writing I do here at Awards Daily. It sounds like you’d be better suited to a site that DOES claim to be objective. I do not. I firmly and admittedly advocate for that which I think DESERVES attention in the race mixed in with what I think has a realistic chance of getting there. And this is a conversation we’ll have to back burner until you can actually see the film.
Is Julianne Moore even still elgible now that Still Alice is dated for mid January? Rosamund Pike is not a surprise. She has been an in contention mention since last year. Eleanor Rigby’s struggle at the box office make it a no but Chastain could get a support nod for AMVY. My list: Witherspoon, Pike, Blunt, Adams with the other slot wide open.
Is the actor race any stronger? All I hear is Cumberbatch, Carell, and Redmayne.
Have you checked out Ida and Belle? There are 2 more good actress bids there.
Is Julianne Moore even still elgible now that Still Alice is dated for mid January? Rosamund Pike is not a surprise. She has been an in contention mention since last year.
I seem to recall having to talk my fellow Oscar bloggers into paying attention to her performance, yes. Still Alice will be given a qualifying run to qualify for awards attention.
I love you your reviews so much — you’re one of the few out there who wants a movie to succeed more than she wants to live up to something you’ve imagined it should be (if that makes any sense whatsoever). That’s the element we’ve been missing (in the mainstream or anywhere) since Roger Ebert died.
I love you your reviews so much — you’re one of the few out there who wants a movie to succeed more than she wants to live up to something you’ve imagined it should be (if that makes any sense whatsoever). That’s the element we’ve been missing (in the mainstream or anywhere) since Roger Ebert died.
Thank you. 🙂
The race has been locked and loaded since Toronto ended.
Moore, Witherspoon, Pike, Jones and Adams.
If anyone can crash is Chastain, but that vote-split it’s just too hard. If the hype is true, she gets some big scenes and a huge emotional showcase in Interstellar, and I believe she’ll get a nomination.
Moore, Witherspoon, Pike, Jones and Adams.
You can’t lock anything until the film’s been seen. Jones is far from a lock. Adams’ movie has not been seen. Swank is a major player. So – yeah. Next.
I’ve been enjoying Rosamund Pike’s works for years (Doom, Jack Reacher, etc.), she’s a secret girl crush of mine. I’m not a Fincher fangirl/boy person, but I’ve seen all his work and I am excited to see Gone Girl. I haven’t read the book or script, so I’m going to steer clear from further analyzing and assessments of this film.
The best actresses director is Von Trier.
Jesus, Sasha you’re such a hyperbolic person! You’re really too promiscuous on the “history” and “classic” words.
Jesus, Sasha you’re such a hyperbolic person! You’re really too promiscuous on the “history” and “classic” words.
You need to reshape this sentence:
Sasha, you’re such a promiscuous person. You are using too many hyperboles with “history” and “classic” words.
I have to echo the sentiment of the first two posters. We’ve been waiting for this movie to come out all year so everyone else could catch up.
Yeah, agree with Robin. Pretty much everyone knew she was going to be nominated once she was announced. It’d be hard not to with that kind of juicy part. But so glad you liked the film!
Yeah, agree with Robin. Pretty much everyone knew she was going to be nominated once she was announced.
No, they didn’t “know” and couldn’t “know” until the film had been seen. Before that it was just a spitball. Unless you are one of those people who remember Munich as having won Best Picture.
“No one really saw Rosamund Pike coming. No one could have figured that this mild mannered actress could pull off such a strangely complicated, childish and monstrous character in the uniquely American tradition of unforgettable femme fatales.”
I am not sure I agree with this part completely. She was penciled into the Best Actress five for some time. The name “Rosamund Pike” was on the lips and the minds of many of us looking forward to awards season. She was kind of a default, if unseen, choice for many I would say. Me included. It was like we all anticipated she would be a Best Actress contender well before anyone saw the movie. And this is not because of the lack of contenders. People were talking about Gone Girl. And David Fincher. It wasn’t even until later we started wondering whether Pike would perhaps be more suited to Best Supporting Actress. Again, before we had seen it. Maybe that was the book. The influence of Gillian Flynn’s writing. And the power of the character of Amy Dunne. Maybe because Rosamund Pike was someone we all like but never talk about. And we anticipated something great from her. And never talked about that. Perhaps from David Fincher? Now she is here, and she is superb, I feel a sense of relief, but mostly, just nodding my head as if we knew this all along. That she would be great. And are very, very excited about it. We were not psychic, we just wanted an accomplished impact like this. And we got it.
Great article though. Again!