I think there are great female performances that just don’t get enough exposure. Still disappointed that Charlize Theron(Young Adult), Elizabeth Olsen(Martha Marcy May Marlene), and Tilda Swinton(We Need To Talk About Kevin). We keep resisting women playing darker characters while men get to be involved in character studies. So what attracts male voters, women playing fairly sympathetic characters or biopic roles.
When I kept on hearing criticism about Jessica Chastain in ZDT it was ‘there was no characterization’, ‘there seemed very little acting there’, ‘I could not really feel for her or relate to her’, etc. when she was portraying this role had it been an actor in the same role would have not had that much scrutiny except maybe the whole notion that his character is blank (frankly for a CIA character, that should be the ideal- not some Carrie Mathieson clinically insane, unrealistic CIA character). But why did we need to know about her beyond her job? It is a procedural. It is about process and her absorbing the various processes of the post-9/11 CIA because that is the character. Why did we need to relate to her or have her be likable? Frankly I know people who found her either too cold or felt like the film was pushing her too much as the lone-wolf, badass so clearly opinions differ on what the film was doing with Maya in the first place. Why did we need moments where we could break our trance as viewers to consider this character to just be acting rather than an absorbing, quiet, mono-maniacal portrayal? I feel like when female characters not really portrayed or seen before, it takes the average viewer or AMPAS member out of their comfort zone and those roles proceeds to get scrutinized and criticized or just shunned rather than rewarded.
I dont think people hate Steven Spielberg. At least, not in mass.
I also dont think people hated Lincoln and aimed to make sure it didnt win.
I mean, look:
It got 12 nominations.
It was probably 2nd place for Director.
It won Best Actor.
It was probably 2nd place for Supp. Actor.
It was probably 2nd place for Supp. Actress.
It was probably 2nd place for Writing, maybe SLP.
It won Art Direction in a bit of a surprise.
It was probably close for Score, they love John Williams.
And it was probably in the top 3 or 4 for Best Picture.
Sorry, i don’t see hate there, at all. Dont get those comments.
And like someone said in the oscast, I forget who:
I bet many movies were very close in vote totals in many categories. So Jennifer Lawrence won, but I bet it was very close with Riva and not a runaway at all. Sure, theres applause and smiles and person A won … That doesnt mean that 6000 people voted for them, maybe only 1600.
Ditto director, supp. actor, writing, score, etc etc. Im sure vote totals were very crunched and no one was so much ahead in the likes of those categories that NO ONE was voting for person a or person b etc.
Agreed, John: the Academy doesn’t hate Spielberg. They nominated him in a very competitive year and they’ve given him two awards over the years, one of very few directors to get multiple awards. I love Lincoln (rank it number 3 of the BP nominees), but will say that there were a few directorial choices that I didn’t like (I.e, the kid in the theater at the end). Little things that detracted from individual voters’ view of the direction might have made the difference.
I also don’t think that the Academy went with a safe choice in Original screenplay. While I too supported ZDT, Tarantino isn’t exactly writing your grandma’s screenplay.
Finally, let’s not get too “hindsight”-y here. Emmanuelle Riva had a chance at the win. I thought it was unlikely, but nowhere near impossible so Ryan’s comment lamenting that we knew the Actress winner in October is patently false. The person who was in the lead in October did win, but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t uncertainty between October and February!
I think there are great female performances that just don’t get enough exposure. Still disappointed that Charlize Theron(Young Adult), Elizabeth Olsen(Martha Marcy May Marlene), and Tilda Swinton(We Need To Talk About Kevin). We keep resisting women playing darker characters while men get to be involved in character studies. So what attracts male voters, women playing fairly sympathetic characters or biopic roles.
James makes an excellent point.
When I kept on hearing criticism about Jessica Chastain in ZDT it was ‘there was no characterization’, ‘there seemed very little acting there’, ‘I could not really feel for her or relate to her’, etc. when she was portraying this role had it been an actor in the same role would have not had that much scrutiny except maybe the whole notion that his character is blank (frankly for a CIA character, that should be the ideal- not some Carrie Mathieson clinically insane, unrealistic CIA character). But why did we need to know about her beyond her job? It is a procedural. It is about process and her absorbing the various processes of the post-9/11 CIA because that is the character. Why did we need to relate to her or have her be likable? Frankly I know people who found her either too cold or felt like the film was pushing her too much as the lone-wolf, badass so clearly opinions differ on what the film was doing with Maya in the first place. Why did we need moments where we could break our trance as viewers to consider this character to just be acting rather than an absorbing, quiet, mono-maniacal portrayal? I feel like when female characters not really portrayed or seen before, it takes the average viewer or AMPAS member out of their comfort zone and those roles proceeds to get scrutinized and criticized or just shunned rather than rewarded.
I dont think people hate Steven Spielberg. At least, not in mass.
I also dont think people hated Lincoln and aimed to make sure it didnt win.
I mean, look:
It got 12 nominations.
It was probably 2nd place for Director.
It won Best Actor.
It was probably 2nd place for Supp. Actor.
It was probably 2nd place for Supp. Actress.
It was probably 2nd place for Writing, maybe SLP.
It won Art Direction in a bit of a surprise.
It was probably close for Score, they love John Williams.
And it was probably in the top 3 or 4 for Best Picture.
Sorry, i don’t see hate there, at all. Dont get those comments.
And like someone said in the oscast, I forget who:
I bet many movies were very close in vote totals in many categories. So Jennifer Lawrence won, but I bet it was very close with Riva and not a runaway at all. Sure, theres applause and smiles and person A won … That doesnt mean that 6000 people voted for them, maybe only 1600.
Ditto director, supp. actor, writing, score, etc etc. Im sure vote totals were very crunched and no one was so much ahead in the likes of those categories that NO ONE was voting for person a or person b etc.
Agreed, John: the Academy doesn’t hate Spielberg. They nominated him in a very competitive year and they’ve given him two awards over the years, one of very few directors to get multiple awards. I love Lincoln (rank it number 3 of the BP nominees), but will say that there were a few directorial choices that I didn’t like (I.e, the kid in the theater at the end). Little things that detracted from individual voters’ view of the direction might have made the difference.
I also don’t think that the Academy went with a safe choice in Original screenplay. While I too supported ZDT, Tarantino isn’t exactly writing your grandma’s screenplay.
Finally, let’s not get too “hindsight”-y here. Emmanuelle Riva had a chance at the win. I thought it was unlikely, but nowhere near impossible so Ryan’s comment lamenting that we knew the Actress winner in October is patently false. The person who was in the lead in October did win, but that doesn’t mean there wasn’t uncertainty between October and February!
October is good. We knew Daniel Day Lewis was going to win for Lincoln even before they started shooting. Talk about boring…
Really late with this and I know it’s history now, but I just found THIS
Sums up the race this year for me. Love it.