Although Joy is under embargo for formal reviews, several people have already written about Lawrence and the film in terms of the Oscar race. The first thing to remember is nobody really knows anything. No one knows how the film will land with critics, with audiences, or with voters. We base our opinions mainly on experience with this kind of thing. Thus, it’s all to be taken with a grain of salt.
You mostly have to go back to Marion Cotillard beating Julie Christie to find a year when the presumed frontrunner early on in the year did not ride that expectation through to the end. Sandra Bullock, Natalie Portman, Meryl Streep, Jennifer Lawrence, Cate Blanchette, Julianne Moore, were all actresses who took the lead early on and maintained that lead with hardcore campaigning at every event, showing voters that they were in it to win it. Cotillard also did that, and Julie Christie did not. Streep had a formidable challenger in Viola Davis, but Streep had Harvey Weinstein behind her and they were in it to win it. It was close, though. That year seemed very close — as evidenced by Davis upsets at the BFCA and SAG Awards.
This year Brie Larson took the early lead as long ago as Telluride. She has been doing the most serious campaigning of all of the actresses so far, with the possible exception of Carey Mulligan, Rooney Mara, Cate Blanchett and Saoirse Ronan. They are all working hard to bring attention to their films, to raise the profile of those films, and perhaps to win an Oscar in the process. You can’t win one anymore by sitting on the sidelines and hoping people notice your good work. Sadly, it doesn’t work like that now, if it ever did. That’s why you see all of the stars showing up to woo the HFPA members at the party for Miss Golden Globe, for instance.
For months, many have been wondering if Jennifer Lawrence could beat Brie Larson, which would make a fascinating showdown between two relative ingenues, age 25 and 26. Last night’s premiere screenings of Joy at several distinguished venues proved Lawrence’s boundless talent as an actress in a wonderfully rare story of a “daring woman” who takes care of her whole family of eccentrics, works, and raises two kids. All the while her ambition to be an inventor who “make things” simmers in the background. Until she decides to take one idea and run with it. Lawrence is focused, serious and a pure pleasure to watch fill an entire screen. David O. Russell never lets any other character take focus away from her and in a feat of revolutionary storytelling, omits the need for a love interest. Even still, the performance is probably not the one that will win her second Oscar so soon. It’s not impossible, but to win a second time she is going to have top Silver Linings Playbook. That year, she was unstoppable as the fresh new face in Hollywood. It’s hard to pull that rabbit out of the hat twice. Still, she will be looking at her fourth Oscar nomination before hitting the age of 30. That’s incredible.
It suddenly seems as though the Best Actress rivalry has perhaps shifted in another direction – to Brie Larson vs. Saoirse Ronan, the charming star of Brooklyn. Both actresses are on the rise, with Ronan having slightly more in her corner with a film that is making money via word of mouth (so is Room but doing it a little more slowly). Ronan already has an Oscar nod for Atonement. More than that, though, Brooklyn is the kind of movie — and she’s the kind of character — you fall in love with. Think: Gwyneth Paltrow in Shakespeare in Love or, for that matter, Lawrence in Silver Linings. Ronan has landed an ideal role and owns it. Few actresses ever have the great fortune to come across such a role, and most never will. Larson, by contrast, does not necessarily seem to be hitting that specific ideal role. She’s great in the film, without a doubt. It’s just that Ronan’s Eilis is such a perfect role for her, tailor-made in so many ways.
But Larson, at least so far, holds onto the lead. And appears to be doing everything that needs to be done to ensure the film is seen and heard by everyone who needs to see it. Hers is another word-of-mouth kind of thing, as is Saoirse Ronan’s. In recent years, the Best Actress race has been dominated by powerhouses — big name actresses who were either way overdue (Moore, Streep) or those who simply gave that one unequivocal performance (Portman). But neither Larson nor Ronan are powerhouses — and beyond avid filmlover circles aren’t well known at all. Larson burst onto the scene just two years ago. She isn’t the big star (quite yet) that Lawrence had already become before her Silver Linings triumph. But she’s really as close as we’ll get to that this year, unless you count Lawrence, which you could certainly do as she carries Joy entirely.
Making matters slightly more complicated are the possible inclusion of Rooney Mara and Alicia Vikander who would probably be campaigned in Supporting if the studios and Oscar strategists had their way. If they do get promoted to Best Actress that could cause problem,s since Vikander has the “it” girl factor going for her, with so many different extraordinary roles under her belt this year. And Mara is as close to a powerhouse big star as you’re likely to get.
Meanwhile, this entire scenario could mean an opening for a powerhouse veteran to sneak in and take it – a Charlotte Rampling, Lily Tomlin or Blyth Danner. It’s certainly possible that in a year of relative unknown actresses, despite the popularity of their films and their resourceful publicists, a bigger star could reap the rewards if the focus on Lawrence wanes.
It seems like a good time for a poll! What think you, dear readers?
Does Jennifer JAson Leigh have a shot at getting nominated for Best Supporting Actress? And if yes, what are her chances of winning? How pivotal is he rpart in The Hateful Eight?
Ronan’s performance in Brooklyn reminds me a bit of Carey Mulligan’s in An Education. Both are luminous and magical, pretty much perfection. I loved Brooklyn so I will most likely be rooting for her on Oscar night if she gets nominated. She may get the BAFTA, while the Academy may go for the American, Larson. In any case, Ronan has taken a big step forward acting wise (though I thought she was striking in Hanna a few years ago). I love the acting in Carol too but I’m not as impressed with Rooney Mara as i was with Blanchett. Then there’s Charlotte Rampling, Blythe Danner and Lily Tomlin, all marvelous. Quite a year for actresses. And it’s too bad Far from the Madding Crowd came out early because Mulligan had an even better role in that than in Suffragette.
“to win a second time she is going to have top Silver Linings Playbook”
Oh my God, she is SOOOO much better in Joy than in Silver Linings Playbook. Like another universe separates those two performances. This is without a shred of doubt her finest performance since Winter’s Bone and could perhaps be the best she’s ever done. I’m saying it is. Larson is GREAT, too. And they’re both named Joy!
Oh great to hear this Chris! Lovely lovely news!!!
Yikes, This thread is scary. I just wanted to add: This year is a win for all these young ladies competing against legendary actresses. 3 possible women who have all added their body of work to the world. Awards Daily loves to take JLAW shots on the threads but honestly as much as you proclaim to be for women and equality, you could do a better job at being fair and equal yourself. When people come and talk about Jennifer as if David O’Russell just showed up last week with no library of work long before he was garnering awards and Harvey, who does wield power, at the end of the day is still up against big studios. So, Harvey backing you isn’t like a Mafia pay off. Lets stop lying about how much that relationship solely has gotten Jennifer ahead. If she truly was terrible as you want her to be, believe me, she wouldn’t be where she is. The Joy character isn’t just 40 the entire film, i believe it spans from her 20s to 40s. You go count how many male stars play younger characters for as much everyone here makes of Jen playing a older woman or when Colin Firth is cast opposite Emma Stone as believable. 3 lead actresses at the very top of their game now is something to actually be applauded. They are torn down enough, can we at least cheer at who’s leading the pack this year in pretty dynamic roles as strong women-centric films.
Scott Feinberg wrote a rave for Lawrence among which “In other words, Joy is about Lawrence — who is a slam-dunk to land her third Oscar nom for a Russell film, if not to beat Room’s Larson or Brooklyn’s Ronan — even more than her two earlier collaborations with the filmmaker.”
Great stuff.
Jennifer Lawrence would be the presumptive front runner, if not for the fact that she is already an Oscar winner – and a very recent one.
Regarding the Cotillard/Christie race. Christie’s no interest in campaigning didn’t help her. But she was already an Oscar winner, so there was less of a need for the Academy to reward her again.
There was nothing to be done against Cotillard’s performance. It was simply too brilliant to ignore it. It is still, one of the best female performances ever in cinema history.
20th Century Fox is in full swing, giving to Lawence their most support – don’t worry !
It had nothing to do with Cotillard giving one of the all time greatest performances? It was good the Academy didn’t embarrass themselves. Marion Cotillard’s performance was second only to Meryl Streep’s performance in “Sophie’s Choice” in the greatest performance by an actress in at least the last forty years.
On one hand Jennifer Lawrence is already an Oscar winner but on the other hand, Brie Larson is a first time Best Actress nominee…So I think it could go either way.
@Hi Sasha, You know, it’s always a big pleasure for me reading your articles. I’m very much grateful & thankful to be part of your community. In your most recent article – Jennifer Lawrence Joy and the Best Actress Race – there’s not much to note beyond what we already knew before. Now, despite a review embargo till december 14., some other awards season pundits are already weighing in on the film’s or Actors quality. I’d very much appreciate to know a little bit more from your impressions of the film and 2-3 actors.
Thank you, Sasha ! b.r.:))
——————-
I’m sick of all the invented rules regarding Jennifer Lawrence, she has delivered a very strong performance already and now supposedly cannot win unless Joy is undeniable and wins Best Picture despite having a much more varied and challenging role than her competitors (she could do Larson’s role in her sleep wheras the opposite could not be said) and despite the likelihood that she alone turned the film into a commercial hit.
Better still all the rules that supposedly existed against her for Winter’s Bone (a much more impressive role than Room or Brooklyn) now magically no longer apply to her competition?
If Jennifer Lawrence gave the best performance then she deserves to win!
I don’t know about Room because I haven’t seen it, but you;re completely mistaken if you think that Jennifer Lawrence could have played Eilis Lacey in Brooklyn anywhere near as sublimely or devastatingly as Saoirse Ronan.
The idea that Lawrence could play the lead role in Brooklyn is laughable. She would be completely wrong for it.
TWC has Woman in Gold on their FYC screening calendar. Between that and Trumbo I wonder if Mirren will be strong. Critics hated The Iron Lady and Streep still won. WiG has similar reviews. Does anyone know whether or not Cotillard is definitely going support for Macbeth?
Some critics disliked The Iron Lady, but Streep did win Best Actress from the NY Film Critics Circle for it.
Wow, the frontrunner in my opinion should not even get a nomination. There are at least 9 performances I’ve seen this year which are way better than Larson’s. Mara, Tomlin, Blanchett, Rampling, Streep, Smith, Blunt, Theron, and of course Saoires Ronan who should win because she is just unforgettable and magnificent in every screen second of Brooklyn.
Rooney and Alicia in Supporting category would be obvious category fraud, we all know that. But if they both ends up in as leads at the Oscars, Supporting Actress category will be such a ghostly wasteland. And Best Actress will be overcrowded, with 2-3 excellent performances surely missing.
Sorry, but I’d like more to see Rooney or Alicia winning than Jane Fonda getting her 3rd Oscar for 5 minutes.
Better Rachel McAdams or Winslet. Or Vikander, yes. Jane Fonda winning for what is a terrible, terrible performance (in a film full of great performance, but go figure how this one went wrong!) would be a crime.
Mara and Vikander in different categories is not happening. Both in Supporting or Lead.
You still would have Winslet, Fonda, Jason Leigh, McAdams, Banks, Ladd, Rossellini, Nixon, and more. The actress categories are an abundance of riches this year.
“The actress categories are an abundance of riches this year.”
Best Actress yes. Supporting (without Mara and Vikander) ? Not so much. Winslet would be most deserving but she is obviously getting only a nom but not winning (because of…sad but true), McAdams was nothing special, Jason Leigh has no chance of winning unless Tarantino doesn’t change her part from script drastically, Ladd and Rossellini…meh. All great actresses but I fell mediocrity here.
Well, we’ll see.
The reactions from HFPA and SAG screenings from yesterday are very passionate. They called the movie “magic2”, “Inspiring” “Real” “Emotional”. This is a BP contender
Based on Twitter? The reaction to LES MISERABLES was just as passionate. Actually, the reaction to INTO THE WOODS was quite strong.
anyone feel The Baftas are better than the Oscars? lots of times when people talk about oscars getting it wrong in what and who they choose to win, more often than not you look at how Bafta went with their choices and they seem to pick the right ones. Boyhood, Goodfellas all won the Bafta. those who hates J Law, Emannuelle Riva won Best Actress in 2013.
Yes the BAFTAs are better than the Oscars. BAFTA likes to reward diverse tastes and also likes to spread the love unlike the Oscars who rewards just one group. For example, last year they could have split the big prizes and given “”Boyhood” Best Picture and Inarritu Best Direction, instead they gave both, plus Best Screenplay, to Inarritu. Now Inarritu has three Oscars while Linklater has none. What an utter joke the Oscars are! But then that’s nothing new because they have also failed to recognise Orson Wells and “Citizen Kane” too.
I wish Anderson had won screenplay last year.
Sasha mentions Bullock as having been the front runner in 09 from the get-go, but I remember that year as having been a little more spread around, particularly with Streep winning NY and Mulligan winning NBR. Bullock was barely in the conversation till the end when boom! In one fell swoop she got BFCA (tied with Streep), SAG and finally Oscar.
The Mara/Vikander category thing: Mara is listed as Lead Actress on the SAG ballot, so she can’t get a SAG supporting nomination. The Nom Committee doesn’t get to choose category; it’s a done deal on a prepared ballot. Not sure where Vikander is on SAG ballot. So the SAG nominations for Supporting Actress are going to bring some surprises, like maybe Mirren for Trumbo, hopefully Allen for Room, Banks for Love&Mercy. And the Academy members, who do get to choose what category to place an actor in on their own ballot, are unlikely to know, now that they no longer get their hands on actually printed trade publications with For Your Consideration ads to instruct them as to category placement (this is why Winslet ended up nominated as Lead for Reader and not Rev Road), they are probably not even going to be aware that there’s a push for Mara and Vikander to be considered Supporting. So I honestly think neither of these two is going to get a Supporting nomination for the Oscar. Supporting Actress is not gonna shape up the way any of us is thinking.
If Mara is lead at the SAG Awards, this means Harvey is preparing something (just as nobody could convince me that he didn’t try to push Winslet in lead for The Reader). Go, Rooney, get that nomination and be a threat!
Re: Sandra, IKR? Ok, other than BAFTA, it was clearly Sandra’s to lose all season long. But all year long before The Blind Side was released, most weren’t foreseeing Bullock to even be nominated. Meryl was the presumptive frontrunner. Creed is arguably having a similar trajectory now.
Jennifer Lawrence, while a darling in public, is not this “incredible” actress many make her out to be. She was good in Winter’s Bone, okay in Silver Lingings Playbook (winning over weak competition), and dreadful in American Hustle (which may not have been her fault; but the way she played it, I was watching a little girl play dress up. The character in AM was meant to be older; Lawrence wasn’t mature enough for it.
As for Joy, I have not seen it. I am not a fan of David O. Russell, as I feel his movies scream “Give me and my cast an Oscar!” However, if she deserves a nomination she’s in. She’s been nominated three times, for 3 Best Picture nominees. Very impressive. Will she win number two? Nothing’s impossible. One thing Lawrence has that Larson doesn’t is name power. She has Hunger Games, her image and all those older male voters who can’t get enough of her sexual flare. But I am not in any rush to see her triumph so soon.
I think Blanchett (Carol) will be nominated a 7th time, but because of her crown 2 years ago it will be challenging to take a third- especially when Streep had to wait AGES to win hers.
We’ll see…
“I was watching a little girl play dress up.” That’s strange, I had the same thought while I was watching Vivian Leigh in her iconic role Scarlett O’Hara in “Gone With The Wind”. Leigh was mesmerizing as the spoiled child who hurt everyone close to her and ended up with no one.
Yes, but at the beginning of GWTW Scarlett is 16 (and she only ages 10-12 years throughout the film), so it’s not a fault with the performance. It’s a part of the character. Big difference.
You are wrong. in AH jennifer Lawrence played this young woman whom Christian Bale’s character married and adopted her son…It was also part of her character. I don’t understand the criticism at all.
Agree. Sure, Amy was older and more wounded than Jen, but he wrote the character with her in mind. She can hardly be called miscast.
Are you honestly comparing the two roles? In GWTW, Scarlett O’Hara evolves in a way that Lawrence’s character absolutely doesn’t in American Hustle. And Leigh nails all the way.
I was just pointing out actors playing childish characters, which was so perfectly played Leigh. The character wasn’t wholly childish. She was manipulative and seductive too.
I think it will also come down to Larson vs. Ronan with an outside chance of Lawrence. Rampling will be lucky to get a nom. Blanchett probably deserves the win, but its only been 2 years.
I just wonder if Larson’s buzz (and the movie itself) can sustain the lonnnng season. Ronan is a prior nominee in a beloved film and to say she is charming is an understatement. I still think Larson has this but, I wonder.
Loving a film cannot carry an actor to victory, if that was the case Keaton would have last year. Larson VS Ronan is a no brainer. Larson wins.
No way does Blanchett deserve to win. Mara outshines her in her own film! And Larson is so much better. Rampling runs circles around her. Yes, it’s apples and oranges but to me, these three performances (Larson, Rampling and Mara) are way more interesting and fully realized.
I think they were pushing Mara for support becaue she has more chance in support and Cate is more likely to be nominated for lead. It will be very difficult for Mara to beat Cate and will hope knock out some of the contenders. Even though I have Larson as favorite to win, I have only Cate and Jlaw as lock for nomination because they have two crucial things: The support and worthy performances. The other candidates, including Mara, have worthy performances but the support is not certain. In the Best Actor race, only Leo is a lock because he seems to have a worthy performance and the support. I’m not sure if his performance is worthy, but Depp has a huge support with SAG and the Academy. Remember he was nominated for “Pirates of The Caribbean” and “The Tourist” I agree with Sasha that Depp is more likely than Damon.
Depp’s SAG noms were for Pirates and Finding Neverland. Where does Sasha say she thinks Depp is more likely than Damon?
Sorry, but Mara so ordinary in that film. I didn’t believe the love between the two, simply because Mara seemed so confused with what kind of emotions to portray. Blanchett, on the other hand, was mesmerizing.
Yes, as I already wrote, Blanchett did her usual stuff. She’s good, yes. But unsurprising. Mara is a revelation.
“No way does Blanchett deserve to win. Mara outshines her in her own film!”
Really?? Hmmm, let’s see
…the Weinstein Co. drama (set for a Dec. 18 release) should have little trouble translating critical plaudits, especially for Cate Blanchett’s incandescent lead performance, into significant year-end attention..
Yet “Carol” ultimately belongs to Blanchett, and rightly so. . (Variety)
And the way Blanchett, an actress of sublime beauty and brilliance, caresses the word “things,” opens up a universe of unspoken desire..Blanchett, a dream walking in Sandy Powell’s frocks, delivers a master class in acting.
(Rolling Stone)
Cate Blanchett is striking in impressive lesbian melodrama… (Independent)
Cate Blanchett and Rooney Mara shine in Todd Haynes’s beautiful, 1950s-set Patricia Highsmith adaptation..This is the story of two women, Carol (Cate Blanchett, staggering) and Therese (Rooney Mara, equally so) (Time Out)
Carol review – Cate Blanchett captivates in woozily obsessive lesbian romance (Guardian)
There’s no doubting the film was financed as an awards-season vehicle for the reaffirmation of Cate Blanchett as one of the great doyennes of acting. (Slant Magazine)
The entire cast is fantastic, from Rooney Mara fostering Therese’s blossoming growth and independence, to Kyle Chandler as the passionate and desperate Harge, but it’s Blanchett who really once again wows with another powerful and emotional turn (Cinema Blend)
…
And I can find just as many raves for Mara, right? So why bother?
In the end, Mara stays with you. It’s a quieter performance. But the thing is Blanchett does her usual stuff. She didn’t surprise me. Mara did. At least the Cannes jury agreed, as did half of the snippets you posted.
Mara surprised yes.. It is no longer surprising for Cate Blanchett to be amazing. My point is that Mara DID NOT outshine Blanchett as you stated.. and no, you won’t find many (if any) reviews that say so. The most you will find is reviews saying they are both superb which is what some of the snippets I intentionally put say.
The fact remains that only one of them has won a prestigious award, and it ain’t Blanchett. Stay pressed.
Ronan is a terrific young actress who is sure to win an Oscar sometime in the future but perhaps not yet. Cate and Jlaw are both big star who have huge support, but they have both won recently and are unlikely to win unless their performance is absolute stellar. Carrey Mulligan has that overdue thing going for her, especially he incredible lose for “An Education”. That leaves the two most likely winners, a one-off powerful performance and meticualous acting honed by experience: Brie Larson and Charlotte Rampling.
I think Larson and Rampling will split awards and Larson will eventually win the Oscar.
I’m just happy that we have a number of really interesting, talented young actresses. It’s a good field to choose from. The lesser knowns will (hopefully) become more visible and find good work and J Law will get paid more. 🙂
Trust me, in an ideal world, she would be paid a lot less (as would ALL her super-rich colleagues).
So you think the producers and studios should make all the profit from the money her name and talent brings in? Yes, let’s all live in Bolivia, where all the money goes to the top 2%.
“Yes, let’s all live in Bolivia, where all the money goes to the top 2%.”
err… as opposed to the far more equitable system in America where all the Oscar voters are in the 2%…
I’m not seeing a lot of advantages for the 98% in either country.
🙂
we could try this:
pay actors half as much so movie budgets are half as much and then movie tickets could cost half as much.
I think even cutting every Oscar fortune in half will still permit most Academy members to remain safely in the 2%
Then I can see twice as many movies. Which is all I care about.
(And I think it would great to live in Boliva. Let’s talk more about this the day after US Election Day next year, and we’ll see where things stand.)
I have to put my hands up and admit I was wrong about Jlaw. I thought she won the Oscar mostly due to her off-screen persona and that there wasn’t anything special about her. She’s repaid the faith the Academy had shown in her by becoming the biggest star and the second highest paid actor. But more important than that, she’s backed up her Oscar win with a third nomination for AH (BAFTA win) and now her solo movie “Joy” which is almost guaranteed to be nominated again. Many actors win an Oscar but never back it up as Jlaw has. Say what you like about her but Jlaw has earned her position and no one has just given it to her. This young women is tough and a role model for many women to go get what they want. You can’t fake what Jlaw has because she’s the real deal.
Yeah, all the J-Law backstabbing is annoying me, as well, it’s ungracious, really. But equally annoying is all this role model-talk in relation to artists. Role models for what? They are not here to be role models, they are here to be judged and appreciated as artists.
Celebrities don’t have a responsibility to be role models, but you as an individual can have anyone as role model. I’m not saying Jlaw is trying to be or should be a role model. I’m saying some people can use her rise as inspiration to achieve their own goals.
Thank god Jennifer Lawrence herself would be the last person to set herself up as a role model — if role model means, “try to be like me, and get where I am in life by doing what I did” — because I seriously doubt Jennifer Lawrence would recommend to any young kid to drop out of school at age 14 and never set foot in any school or classroom ever again. Go to NYC, become a model instead. No. That’s a Hoop Dream. It’s not a logical game plan for anyone who doesn’t possess extraordinary beauty and camera presence.
If millions of young girls wanted to follow that path it would be a lesson in failure and abject rejection for millions of girls — (and, sure, it would work out great for handful of them). So I don’t think we want to hold that up as a shining example of “all you have to do it just want it bad enough, and you’ll get it” because that’s just delusional.
Yes, for a lucky few who are blessed with a certain look and a special verve and a gift for acting, it might ultimately result in salaries of $15 million per movie but I think we all agree that a true “role model” should be able to serve as a model that leads to success for more than a dozen girls out of 200 million. Because Yay for those lucky dozen, You go girls! But I sort of can’t avoid worrying about those other 199,999,988 girls who might dream of dropping out of school at age 14 so that they can be movie stars. “Because Jennifer Lawrence did it, why can’t I?” Well, sorry, but lots reasons why not.
This is no reflection at all on the undeniable and somewhat astonishing film presence that Jennifer Lawrence felt she had, and couldn’t wait to unleash, and proved that she had. But I would also like to remind aspiring teenage girls that it’s possible to begin a career as a teenage actress and still find time to squeeze in an education too. Like Jodie Foster did, like Emma Watson is doing, like Natalie Portman did.
Of course, 200 million teenage girls are never going to see my advice in this comment, but they will see Jennifer Lawrence and want to be like her — even though I do feel confident that Lawrence herself would caution all of them: “Don’t get your hopes up, not unless you look the way I looked at age 14, and even then, maybe stay in school just in case you don’t win the modeling and TV casting luck lottery like I did.”
I don’t mean copy her life like a copybook. I mean, learn from her toughness and how she handles herself.
john smith, I don’t want to get bogged down in this because the more I raise an eyebrow at this kind of talk the more I risk looking like I’m taking a mean swipe at Jennifer Lawrence, which is not my intention at all. She didn’t ask to be put in the position of having people dispute whether or not she’s someone whose life choices are worthy to emulate or not.
But here’s how I feel. If millions of young girls want to learn from a woman about toughness and how to handle themselves, maybe those millions of young girl could look to millions of their own mothers as a role models. How about that? Is there a shortage of mothers in the world worth looking up to as role models? No, there is no shortage.
Seems quite handy and actually a lot more likely to have direct practical relevance in millions of ways for girls to look to their own mothers for tips about how to handle themselves and how to develop toughness, in specific ways much more applicable to the normal lives millions of us lead.
Because I’ll be honest, I don’t see much value in observing how Jennifer Lawrence “handles herself” with Jimmy Fallon. And here’s another thing: I never once ever saw Jennifer Lawrence exhibit any “toughness” unless it was in a movie playing a fictional character.
So I’m just sayin, I could watch every scrap of film footage of Jennifer Lawrence that has ever been shot and I would not learn a fuckin thing about “how to handle” myself or how to acquire the “toughness” required to navigate the red carpet.
So let’s please cease pretending that any of us are ever going to have to survive the Hunger Games or will have to survive talking to Jimmy Fallon for 15 minutes.
And this way we ease the burden off the shoulders of Jennifer Lawrence so that she can focus all her substantial and impressive energy in the pursuit of her own massive bank account that’s been built on the very same degree of talent that any of 20 million pretty vivacious photogenic girls were born with — if only there were 20 million blockbuster movie franchises that existed for them all to star in.
You think she’s in the position she’s in now because it was given to her? Every industry is tough to climb the ladder especially if you are a women or a minority. She climbed to the top of her industry in a short space of time, that doesn’t happen to just anyone. Of course, there is no doubt her looks help her but that alone or even combined with great ability doesn’t make it you the second higest earner and one of the most in demand actors in Hollywood. Of course, we are looking from the outside and don’t really how she handles self in private. Professionally and publically she’s handles herself very well. I agree with you that people should have someone they know as role model than someone who is famous but you have no idea what they’re really like. My role model was my uncle who was a hit with the ladies and the guys, has a sharp wit and was strong physically. Sadly, I am nothing like him. Maybe role model is not right word, it’s more looking up to someone and admiring what they do.
“You think she’s in the position she’s in now because it was given to her? She climbed to the top of her industry in a short space of time, that doesn’t happen to just anyone.”
First, let’s not make it sound like she scaled Mt Everest. She got her parents to take her to the metaphorical foot of Mt Everest and she showed people that she was a good climber in a 15-minute test climb, and then powerful people said: “Great. Here, hop aboard this helicopter called Hunger Games and we will fly you to the peak of Highest Paid Actress Everest, because damn, you’ve got a really good agent. Lots of raw talent and energy and pizzazz, to be sure, but mostly we’re giving you all this money because your agent is great at bringing you to our attention and then making us sign these contracts.”
You’re talking about making money, and I thought we were talking about the logic of looking at an actress as a “role model” (or even looking at a saucy actress and thinking, “Dang. If I could only get my chance to be an outspoken scamp on TV talk shows then I could command 15 million dollars anytime anybody pointed a camera at me.”)
You seem to be changing the subject, and now you’re trying to twist this into accusing me of not understanding how exceptionally rare and nearly impossibly difficult it is for 1 out of 150 million American women to become the highest paid movie star in Hollywood. Which, if you go back and check my previous eye-roll, is exactly what I’ve been saying:
I’m saying, yes, IT IS IMPOSSIBLY RARE for this to happen and there is no room at the top AT ALL for more than 1 or 2 women to do this, and only about 100 actresses out of hundreds of thousands can ever even come close.
So how the heck is this a viable “role model” — it’s not even as much of an attainable logical role model as Neurosurgeon Barbie, because there are, in fact, hundreds of female neurosurgeons. All of them I imagine know how to handle themselves and have “toughness” and they’ve got that other thing I’m concerned about: an education. Not to mention they save lives and whatnot.
You are making my argument for me: Unless there are 1 million blockbuster movies in multiplexes, then there can NEVER be 1 million actresses who earn $15 million per movie, so where does the actual practicality of this role model emulation come in? It doesn’t. Instead, it looks like a path to frustration and a bitter recipe for disappointment for millions of girls who might think they can be as lucky as JLaw has been — and they are all in for a rude awakening if they ever drop out of high school to go try.
“Of course, there is no doubt her looks help her…”
ya think? I wonder how many working actresses can land the roles in billion dollar movie franchises without being gorgeous. Let’s ask the 100,000 other female SAG members what they think. (many of whom are totally gorgeous, and look at their silly careers of only barely making a living.)
Are all those no-Oscar non-millionaire acting careers a result of those other 100,000 beautiful actresses being unable to “know how to handle themselves” “publicly or professionally” or because they lack “toughness”? Has it not occurred to any of those 100,000 actresses to try to “handle themselves” the same way JLaw handles herself or to have the same kind of “toughness”?
Call it role model or anything you want, If what JLaw has achieved is something that another actress or human being can “learn from” and emulate, then what’s wrong with all the women in America? Why is nobody else any good at becoming the highest paid actress in Hollywood?
Here’s what I suspect: Yes, a casting director handed Jennifer Lawrence the same fortuitous string of roles that thousands of other actresses could have handled just as well — and in many cases even better.
So yes, you have me cornered. You have my back against the wall: I guess I am saying that the life Jennifer Lawrence now leads was basically handed to her, given to her, in a very real sense. She was in the right place at the right time and impressed the right people for whatever reasons. And she made that happen by being in the waiting room of a casting agency at the age of 14 instead of sitting in 9th grade civics class.
But I’m tellin you, there are not enough seats in all the waiting rooms of all the casting agencies all across the USA to accommodate the dreams of millions – or even thousands, or hundreds – of 9th grade dropouts.
That kind of luck and perfect timing is not something that anybody should believe can be duplicated, except once or twice in a generation. And that’s why I think it’s nuts for anyone to look at the career arc of Jennifer Lawrence and think: “If she can do it, then so can I.” “…I want to be like JLaw.” How? In what way? Just in terms of being “tough” and “knowing how to handle herself” — because I assure you I have never known any woman in my life who did not possess those qualities, and many many of them figured out how to do it with no help from watching Lawrence, long before Lawrence was even born.
Lawrence did nothing to create The Hunger Games and X-Men. The opposite happened. Those movies created her success.
Thanks almost entirely to The Hunger Games and X-Men existing, Lawrence is indeed the reigning princess of Hollywood money and worldwide recognition, but surely we can agree that only 2 or 3 other actresses are ever going to come close to the level of fame and financial success, and 100,000 actresses will not, will never, and 10,000,000 aspiring actresses will settle on 10,000,000 other kinds of dreams and find 10,000,000 other kinds of happiness that has fuck-all to do with Jennifer Lawrence and her drop-out-of-high-school strategy.
While I agree that becoming a star like Lawrence is nearly impossible, I think that Jennifer Lawrence is responsible for at least 70% of her success, the rest being some luck in meeting the right people. Check your facts! Her performance in Hunger Games was not her breakthrough performance. At age 20 she didn’t shower for like 2 weeks, she got out and auditioned for a film called Winter’s Bone, a part that she was told she couldn’t play because she was to pretty, so she made herself look less pretty and got the part. That takes guts, determination and a lot of talent to convince someone you are the one to play the part. She was of course nominated for an Oscar and then she had to audition for the Hunger Games and convince them she was Katniss and she did it. Does it end here? Of course not, she had to audition again for Silver Linings and had to beat actresses like Angelina Jolie and Anne Hathaway for the part. She did it and won the Oscar. An agent can do nothing if you don’t win the part, she did it herself. With hard work and determination, on top of talent. As Jennifer’s character in Joy says: “The world doesn’t owe you a thing”.
“Check your facts!”
um, ok, Fun With Facts:
David O Russell re Silver Linings:
so here we have DOR saying with straight face that he and Harvey cast JLaw because they both agreed that she could pass for a 40-yr-old.
That’s exactly what’s he saying, right? That’s the ‘fact’ he’s telling us.
It’s a role for a 40-yr-old woman, the character in the book is unmistakably over 40.
So they look at JLaw and these two grown men fall head over heels for her audition… because she looks so 40ish.
That’s a Hollywood fact, as told by Hollywood fact-teller David O Russell. “We hired Jennifer Lawrence because I convinced Harvey that she looks 40-something. Harvey took one look and saw exactly what I meant.”
I know when I saw Silver Linings Playbook, I was always wondering, “Wow, is this girl 20 or 40?” I know many of us were equally mystified and hypnotized, right?
Russell frames a lot of shots this way so it only enhances the magical movie illusion of 40ishness.
“so here we have DOR saying with straight face that he and Harvey cast JLaw because they both agreed that she could pass for a 40-yr-old. That’s exactly what’s he saying, right? That’s the ‘fact’ he’s telling us”…NO. That’s not what he is saying. If you listen to his interview, he said that they were both blown away by her performance, not for the fact that she could look like 40 years old…But, what was the point of your comment? We were talking about Jennifer Lawrence’s start from the bottom, not the age issue…
“But, what was the point of your comment? We were talking about Jennifer Lawrence’s start from the bottom…”
Jennifer Lawrence’s start from the bottom? You mean the way she started with her virtual movie debut by being nominated for Best Actress? (Deservedly so. But where is this “bottom” she clawed her way up from?)
I’m talking about you telling me to “Check your facts.”
I’m talking about the FACT that the mythology that’s been created around Jennifer Lawrence is mostly a brilliantly orchestrated PR backstory of manuFACTured falsehoods and faux Cinderella bullshit. It’s one of the best examples of Hollywood image creation since the Star Factory era faded 50 years ago.
No, I recognise strong personalities. It’s the same with Hilary Clinton. There are few women who climb to the top of their industry let alone climb as quickly and smoothly as Jlaw has. I’m saying you can be an inspiration to anyone who wants to get to the top of any industry or whatever goals you have. The fact she’s an exception in her industry shouldn’t stop others from trying to do achieve their goal and breaking down barriers. Why should something being difficult to obtain stop you from trying to get it? Would Hilary Clinton have ever been this close to become the first female president of the US if she thought it was unattainable? Rich for the sky. The film industry must change to appeal in order to a more aware and demanding audience. Jlaw is the first of this change but many more are sure to follow.
Amen!
I believe the strength of the performance is really secondary at best in these wins, so I believe two of the biggest factors will be whether there will be backlash against Lawrence (we see it here in the comments–“she’s too hyped; she’s everywhere; etc.) and whether the feeling that that Blanchett won “too” recently. If the Blue Jasmine win hadn’t happened, I think she would be in the lead this year. I would actually love to say Rampling had a chance, but I don’t think it will happen. I’m still hoping she gets a nomination, though.
So: if the 20-somethings split votes, I could see it going Blanchett’s way, but I don’t think she can generate that much heat again. Leaving Lawrence, Ronan, and Larson. Working for Lawrence: enormous fame, consistently strong performances (even in movies where I think she’s wildly miscast like American Hustle, I think her work is at least very good). Working against Lawrence: Over-saturation, and the feeling that she’s “too young” or it’s “too soon.” With Larson and Ronan, we have this: they’re both hugely talented actors doing exceptional work in wonderful movies. They both have built careers that are longer and stronger than almost any other actors their age, though neither has quite broken through to being famous. I don’t know how I would decide between the two–the showier role Larson has or the more loveable role Ronan has. And I wonder if in this year of really wonderful female roles, these two split enough, leaving room for Lawrence to overtake the things working against her. As of now, my brain say yes–Lawrence gets the win. Apparently I needed to work this all out in a comment to figure out my vote!
If the 20-somethings split the vote (which I don’t see happening), it is RAMPLING who benefits, not Blanchett. Rampling is somebody they know, somebody they’ve seen on screen for years and years and years. She’s always brilliant and she’s never been recognized. And she has the performance. She has the powerful narrative.
I want to believe that you’re right, but I fear that Rampling’s history is in movies that are more art-house (or just more French) than much of what the Academy is watching. It’s very, very cynical of me, I know. But I think of Emmanuelle Riva a few years ago. She also had decades of extraordinary work and also had the performance (and in a Best Picture contender to boot) but still wasn’t able to win. Rampling benefits from this being a more divisive year and from her movie being in English this time, but somehow I still don’t see it being enough. Whereas Blanchett has a great performance, the legacy as an actor loved by the Academy, and the support of The Weinstein Company. I mean…it’s all speculative, but my head is giving the greater chance to Blanchett while my heart wants it to go to Rampling.
Blanchett has internal competition and there are a lot of people (myself included) who simply responded to Mara much more. Emotionally.
The Academy’s insufferable conformism inflicted us an endless sequence of Maryl Streep and now someone is concerned that a 2nd Oscar for JLaw would arrive too soon. Really? JLaw is the most influential, the most popular, the most brilliant actress of her generation, probably the best thing happened to american cinema in ages. This is a golden chance for the Academy to be relevant again, I hope they’ll take it. And if you don’t wanna talk about pop culture let’s talk about acting. Can’t you see how spontaneous, how free of affectations is JLaw’s acting? She is not posed like Blanchett, that’s why she connects with the crowd. Critics prefer constraint to instinct but talent beats practice, always.
Giving Jlaw a second Oscar is not going to change any of the things you said. And to their credit, the Academy were the first to realise her potential by giving her an Oscar so early in her career. If she really has the best performance, she will win. She doesn’t really need it, since she’s already the biggest star and can demand any role and wage she wants. Her fans should calm down a bit. She’s good and has already won. She doesn’t need all the fuss about her not winning again.
But you have to admit it would be fun to see her win again and probably make fun of her famous stumble for the first win…That alone would make the Oscars night.
Yeah, OK, give me FIVE !:))
She’s already very rich, has won many awards and has big fan base. She can do anything she wants but she’s still the same and want to keep proving herself even though she doesn’t need to. So yeah, a second Oscar would be fun but no big deal, really.
Agreed…and BRAVO!. I couldn’t have put it better myself!.
The best thing to happen to American cinema in ages?! Pity the American cinema if this were even remotely true!
I think that if you look at cinema history, there is very few names that come close to the kind of success and dominance that Jennifer Lawrence has achieved in just 5 years…
She’s popular, so what? It’s like saying that Madonna is the best thing that happened to American music in the last 50 years. Popularity – yes. Quality – meh.
I wonder what makes you the ultimate judge when it comes to quality…If to millions madonna’s songs are masterpieces who are you to say they are not. I cold say that Picasso or Miro are overrated and that a child could do the same stupid painting. So what makes them genius other than people’s appreciation for their work? Why isn’t the most talented painter on the street considered a genius like them? Popularity and people’s taste also play a role. So what is the definition of quality, when it comes to acting? It’s all a question of taste, it’s all subjective. When I think of Jennifer Lawrence’s acting, quality is the first thing that comes to my mind. Someone can be both popular and have great quality, they are not mutually exclusive.
When 45 Years gets out, Charlotte Rampling will blow all these youngsters away
God, I hope you’re right! Knowing how Awards Season works, though…
The frontrunner is still Brie Larson, whatever JLaw’s fans may say. I’ll believe Lawrence’s frontrunner status if and when she wins SAG.
Why do people get to say “the frontrunner is…” or “the frontrunner is still…”? There have been no indications of anything except podcasts and articles by pundits who know nothing.
@ Sasha,
You can’t let go of Davis vs. Streep which is your right but your statement that Bullock had the early lead is completely misleading. Bullock didn’t really figure in the race until mid-December and the moneymaking factor. December was all about Streep and Mulligan a distant second. Bullock was a possibility in late December but she didn’t have a shot, according to most people, until the Globe win.
So you people want Jennifer Lawrence to have two oscars.The oscars is really loosing it’s value.It should be named the popular award..
Streep’s third for s***fest Iron Lady = losing its value. JLaw’s second for Joy = not. See performance first before you pass the judgement.
Disgusting! It’s way to easy to bash a great actor who has been robbed countless times. She deserved that Oscar and she was snubbed for great work to give Oscars to mediocre work by Sandra Bullock and Catherine Zeta-Jones for example. And you can go on defending the mediocrity of Jennifer Lawrence.
If there’s one living actress who has received her due, it’s Meryl. I think she is deserving of two (maybe three) Oscars (Sophie’s Choice, Silkwood and – maybe – Adaptation, in a pretty weak year for the supporting category), but no one in their right mind would defend each and every nomination she has received. 19? Who deserves that number of nominations when you think about the number of amazing performances that gets left out each year?! I attribute her 19 nominations to the lack of imagination and all-round conformity of the voters in question and to the media who are instrumental in sorting out what voters take notice of.
She received her due? Really?!
No, I won’t defend all 19 nominations, but at least 15 of her nominations have been extremely well-deserved. Who else could say that? But she gets bashed for her number of nominations all the time. It’s an easy target. You all forget that every actor gets nominations just because they’re a part of the club. But nobody seems to care about that when it comes to Blanchett (who was nominated for the ridiculous Elizabeth: The Golden Age and made it into supporting for a leading performance with Notes on a Scandal; at least BAFTA considered her lead and ignored her) or Winslet (who has been nominated for stuff like Titanic). So Meryl received her due only because she’s nominated a lot? Please.
The woman deserves at least five Oscars – Kramer vs. Kramer, Sophie’s Choice, Silkwood, A Cry in the Dark, Adaptation.
What’s your logic? That the Academy should spread the wealth? They do that a lot. They reward mediocre work by Sandra Bullock and many others.But in the end, people will make it look as if Meryl won her third Oscar just because of Weinstein, campaign, blah blah.. Just take a look at what Sasha wrote in this piece and she usually repeats all the time that she’s all for giving Meryl Streep all the Oscars. She doesn’t mention the campaigns and the inclusion of Weinstein when it comes to Winslet for example. She doesn’t mention Davis’s aggressive campaign or Bullock’s ugly tricks to win that Oscar. But she mentions Meryl.. Again, an easy target but this is an ugly move.
You’re absolutely right that this problem is not EXCLUSIVELY about Meryl. But she is EMBLEMATIC of it (who wouldn’t be with 19 nominations to their name, among them execrable trash like Into the Woods?).
I agree, that most stars tend to cruise to nominations once they have become members of the club (yes, Winslet and Blanchett are examples of this, as are Depp in 00s, where he received three nominations for vastly inferior work to his 90s heyday). That’s the thing with big movie stars: they get nominations for doing the obvious (Pitt got nominated for ‘Benjamin Button’, but not for ‘Tree of Life’, SOO typical…)
With regards to that Iron Lady win: I didn’t favor either Streep or Davis because I didn’t like none of the films in question. And I have to like a movie in order to go with rewarding the actors involved. So I was quite indifferent to that years’ race (where I felt that a lot of actually deserving actresses in minor films didn’t get a chance to be nominated because of all the prestige movie bullshit ruling the day), BUT it was quite obvious that Meryl tried to strike a difficult balance between applauding and standing up for Davis (as a former co-star and as a black woman up for a best actress honor) and playing the game ruthlessly for HERSELF. She WANTED that Oscar, that much was obvious.
(On a side note: Her anti-Disney rant a couple of years ago when going up against Emma Thompson was another example of Meryl choosing to take an active part in securing her own position…)
The thing about the ‘club members’… they talk about the Oscars like it’s not a big deal, yet they campaign with all they’ve got (most of them, anyway, also the ones like Depp, who says he is not the least interested). Look at that Redmayne… he is SO into this game already, and he’s barely 30. It’s a bit gross, actually. Or maybe I’m just a puritanical son of a bitch (or maybe I’m envious, who knows?) You’ll be the judge.
The Emma Thompson thing is so overblown. Meryl made the comment during her NBR tribute to Emma Thompson on Jan 7th. The ballots were due the next day. The scandal broke out mostly after the ballots were due and if you somehow believe that Meryl was able to make a scandal and influence voters in a few hours (and that’s if we take for granted that the scandal broke right away, which it did’t), do t!
On 2012: The thing is that Meryl actually had a campaign that year. She didn’t campaign for Julie & Julia. But be honest here: did’t Davis had ten times the campaign Meryl had? Didn’t Glenn Close campaign her ass off?
Did Viola have ten times the campaign? I don’t think so. She had a powerful narrative, yes, and public perception was very positive (as with everything The Help-related), but Streep and Weinstein doing business together campaign-wise, that’s a powerful ingredient.
Yes, Close campaigned her ass off. Actually, they all do. They are members of the club, you know.
Viola was the top campaigner that year. That year alone she topped the number of interviews Streep gave in her whole career. She was everywhere and she spoke always of the same thing. She wanted that Oscar badly. I don’t blame her but it’s even an understatement to say that she outcampaigned Streep. She outcampaigned her by the distance between the Earth and the moon.
Streep actually had a rather subdued campaign. She gave more interviews than usual but that’s about it. In her case, it’s the whole Streep year (with the Kennedy Center Honor and Berlin Film Festival Honorary Award thing). The press was behind her. To everybody who didn’t follow the race as closely as we did, Streep was unbeatable that year. Harvey didn’t go big and if you think about it for a second, there was no way for Meryl to win if she went big against a competitor like Davis, so she mostly went the fine line between campaigning for herself and Viola. In the end, Weinstein did the one thing he had to do to see Meryl win – he reminded them that she didn’t have 10 Oscars. This is actually something a lot of people I know believe. It also helped the critics were behind Meryl. She won the New York Film Critics and LAFCA/NSFC went with actresses with no shot at Oscar glory.
In the end, it was a smart campaign but it wasn’t a big one. Just show me the facts to prove it was.. I don’t see how this could be the case.
To be fair to Cate she admitted as such and was campaigning for Marion Cotillard to win fro “La vie En Rose”. Cate might not have great in “The Golden Age”, but remember she was criminally overlooked by the Academy for Gweneth Paltrow for “Shakespeare In Love”.
Yes, Julianne Moore was snubbed for Boogie Nights and robbed for Far From Heaven and they still didn’t nominate her for The Kids Are All Right and A Single Man.
And by the way, 1998 is tricky. Blanchett is the poster girl of the 1998 snubs but people should really see CENTRAL STATION and let’s talk about snubs.
“Disgusting!’
Exactly what win for Iron Lady was.
Also, while I’m not a fan of DOR movies he hasn’t made anything with Jlaw that’s close to POS that’s Iron Lady. And that includes Joy (which I saw).
I agree with you about Streep being robbed countless times before she won for “The Iron Lady” and Bullock and Zeta Jones. I disagree with onJlaw, she has been nominated three times, soon to be four, and has backed up her Oscar win with “AH” an “Joy”.
An actor acts but a poser is a great campaigner. You seem to like the latter, which is not surprising since you have just about insulted ever great actor including Streep, Cate Blanchet, Cotillard to Fassbender. I would like to see fanboy favourites like Leo and Damon, give a performance as good Cotillard in “La Vie En Rose”, Fassbender in “Shame”, and Blanchet and Streep in err…. everything. Can you imagine leo and Damon in RST. It would be hilarious!
Since I don’t think that Shame is be all and end all of performances, Leo and Damon already gave better performance. And Fassbender would bomb movies that Leo and Damon made hits because he’s unlikeable and doesn’t have enough charisma.
Streep’s win for Iron Lady was ridiculous. They should have given it to her for Devil Wears Prada. Great movie, performance and memorable pop culture icon character. That’s all.
Blanchett is a certified ham. She’s lucky that AMPAS falls for that and so do critics but that kind of acting isn’t my cup of tea. Worked in Blue jasmine because jasmine is so likeable despite herself. But Galadriel and Elizabeth Golden Age. Oy vey!
Don’t care about Cotillard, never seen that French movie. Her dying in TDKR is camp classic, tho.
Can you name of their performance that is anyway as good Fassbender’s in “Shame”? You are just the biggest troll here. You’re making absolutely no sense whatsoever. Great actor are hammy but fanboy favourite like Leo and Damon are good?
Dude, can’t you read? Shame isn’t the greatest performance ever. So everything they did was better than that, IMO. OK. EVERYTHING.
Wow! You are such an authority on acting and films. Your hate is useless. Cate, Marion, Streep all won despite your hate and soon Fassbender will join them. so what good is your hate going to do then?
No, your stanning is useless. I don’t care for Shame (and, BTW, your precious wasn’t even nominated for that so AMPAS aren’t always brainless sheep they are made out to be). Oscars are no proof of greatness since your winners are in company of some dubious and some downright embarrassing wins (that includes Caricature Hepburn).
moreover, if you were a real fan you wouldn’t want your fave to win for SJ – a bomb, a performance that general public rejects and thus will not be remembered fondly. The trick is to win with the right role and the right movie and SJ is neither.
Streep, Blanchett, Cotillard…They are all posers, campaigners. Why do you think Meryl Streep is so much loved and is nominated for even the most stupid role? Because her acting on screen and off screen is great. If you want to win nowadays you have to campaign. “Best performance” is such a subjective thing. One may like more Blanchett’s acting style while others prefer Jennifer Lawrence’s acting style. Film is subjective. Who is better, Robert De Niro or Daniel Day Lewis or Jack Nicholson? Your preferences will make you chose but the right answer is that their style is different and they are all great.
Jack is maybe a bit different but the other two are very similar. So what you’re saying that people cannot judge what’s good from what’s objectively? There is consensus but some don’t even accept that. This is how are world is run and we all make judgements every day. We can have different taste but there is always consensus because how the world works.In most people’s opinion and especially those who work in the industry and her peers, Cate is one of the finest actresses around. If you want to debate that, that’s your choice but it’s not the opinion of the people who matter, her fellow actors.
“Cate is one of the finest actresses around. If you want to debate that, that’s your choice but it’s not the opinion of the people who matter, her fellow actors”…Exactly the same statement applies to Lawrence. At only 25, she has already 3, soon 4 Oscar noms and 1 win…If you want to debate that she is not a great actress, that’s your choice but it’s not the opinion of the people who matter (Academy members), her fellow actors.
Jennifer Lawrence should have won for Winter’s Bone. She was better than what she did in SLP. Winter’s Bone was way more dimensional of a character. And she lost to who? . . . Um, . . . Natalie Portman? . . . um, never mind.
JLaw in Winter Bone and Catching Fire >>>>>>>>>> JLaw in DOR opus save Joy. he makes everyone ham it up to embarrassing levels but I guess JLaw took control of it by now and she’s incredible in Joy.
I voted for Saoirse Ronan simply because I think her film has the best shot to win Best Picture and that – or just coming close to that – could seal the deal for the lead as it often does. In an ideal world, CAROL would be the BP frontrunner – and with a little help from critics groups, it still might be – but even if that happens, Blanchett and Mara are in peculiar positions : Mara could be hurt by severe category confusion (=fraud) and Blanchett is a very recent winner AND both have to overcome the usually impossible-to-overcome internal competition curse. Brie Larson could be it but unlike Julianne Moore’s little indie last year, her movie must be embraced fully (at least a filler BP nod) and making a bit more money wouldn’t hurt either, especially if Jennifer Lawrence gets the reviews AND turns JOY into a big moneymaker, making every other contender look bad (BO-wise) in the process. Meanwhile here I’m hoping Carey Mulligan will not only score a nod (she seems to be fighting for the fifth slot at the moment) but could actually be a proper threat for the win. Pipe dream. I know.
Anyway that’s five : Ronan, Larson, Blanchett,Lawrence, Mulligan. I do have a sneaking suspicion Mara will be nominated here though and in that case Mulligan would be probably the one to be bumped unfortunately, though internal competition could even result a shocking Blanchett snub, as well.
And that’s just those six, and I think four tops will be in the final quintet from those six. It would be probably the youngest BA lineup of all time and that probably won’t happen when SO many beloved veterans are bringing their A-game this year. Someone from the Rampling-Tomlin-Danner-Smith quartet will probably sneak in. My money is on Rampling though Danner seems to have a rock solid campaign, so that should count.
P.S. I don’t think Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl) will pull off the lead switch, especially not if Mara does because unlike Mara’s film, Vikander’s is just not that strong…or at least it isn’t perceived that strong.
how can you be a frontrunner if you havent won any awards yet? not doubting your conclusions, but brie larson is the front runner because the experts say she is? but she hasnt won any of the major awards yet. meaning, NYFCC, LAFC, Globes, SAG, Bafta etc. I think if she picks up one of the major critic awards early, then sure, i’ll say she is the frontrunner but even then, its still up in the air.
But I see David Poland making grand declaritive statements as is his wont and i’m like, lets wait a minute. Lets see how well Joy does, if its a $100 million grosser, and her record with and without David O russels says its likely to be, how does she not win? A great performance in the biggest film starring a woman? just like Sandra Bullock for blind side.
Having said that, Jennifer doesnt need a win, she just needs nominations at this point. that will be indicative of a great career. and none of my skepticism is to doubt Larson or Soiran. they are all deserving as far as i am concerned. an im glad to see films that women are the main focus getting a lot of love. just wondering why larson is considered the favourite beyond , “the oscar experts say so”. with all due respect to oscar experts, of which i consider sasha the best,.
Poland = click bait Best way to attract clicks is to be a contrarian.
Also, right on money that frontrunners are really decided by awards, not so much by reviews.
It’s true. Lawrence doesn’t need another win for yet another David movie. Her career barely started, she has so much ahead of her. If she wins again now no matter how good her performances will in the future and i believe she is getting better as she matures it will be completely dismissed for any awards for at least a decade. I hope she wins her second for other movie.
Ronan is really, really good. I think she fully deserves the nomination. I don’t know if she deserves the win, though. It’s hard to explain, but the performance doesn’t have that must-win quality to me. Not like, say, Larson gave me in Short Term 12 (and may again with Room).
I think Cotillard is campaigning in Supporting for Macbeth. JLaw for the win hopefully!
Cotillard is always campaigning hard. Always.
I’m not sure if you’ve had the chance to see Brooklyn, but Saoirse’s performance is simply stunning. I’m biased because I happen to be a huge fan, but please take the time to read some of the major reviews, and you’ll find the praise she receives is off the charts. This is obviously a year in which we are lucky to have many excellent best actress performances, but to dismiss her chances of actually winning is misguided.
I haven’t see Joy yet so don’t know about JLaw but from what I’ve seen it should be between Cate Blanchett and Rooney Mara. Maybe even an ex-aequo.
To me it should be between Brie Larson, Ronan and Mara (she stole my heart in this film). Maybe Brie will take it and it will be extremely well deserved.
I really hope JLaw doesn’t win this time. I do think as a few here, that she is overrated. I think she is a good actress but can’t really see her ‘magic’ and to me she does the same flat acting in every movie. She already has an Oscar she didn’t really deserve and it would be horrific that she won a second one. Academy, please NO. Haters can hate and I don’t care but please do note I’m not using any insulting words. By now, Cate Blanchett is more deserving of a 3rd Oscar than Lawrence of a second but this time it should go to Brie Larson.
Jennifer Lawrence is in a league of her own. She is only 25, yet she seems to be already a veteran, carrying a huge franchise on her shoulders like it was nothing and at the same time starring in artistic movies like Joy, showing her acting range. That is impressive and incredible. If her performance is great and if she deserves it, she will win her second Oscar this year.
Again, overrated. I don’t think she’s carrying THG on her shoulders alone at all. Why do people underestimate the power of the books themselves, of the awesome special effects and most importantly of the other cast.. I for example love watching Hermsworth and Hutcherson (eye candies) 🙂 but Banks is delightful, PSH was great of course, Stanley Tucci is fun to watch too and so on.. I don’t believe for a second that people have gone to see these movies just because of her. I certainly have not.
With your way of thinking, everybody is overrated. Meryl Streep being nominated just because of her name, overrated. Katharine Hepburn, they said about her the same thing you say about Lawrence, that she did the same flat acting in every movie, overrated. That’s ridiculous. Go watch Winter’s Bone, then watch Hunger Games, Silver Linings…amazing, amazing performances and incredible range. If you can’t admit she is a great actress you really must be blind.
It is your opinion against mine. Nothing we can do mate. I have watched those movies and I don’t find her range amazing. Just flat. Only loved Winter’s bone performance. Plus my reply was specific about THG and your reply to it doesn’t make sense at all and to me Streep DOES have a huge range.. No comparison there man. Over this discussion tbh.
Jlaw doesn’t carry THG alone, that’s totally true. However, she blended with the character so well that it elevated the boxoffice. With a different actress you would get Divergent type of success. JLaw is to THG what’s RDJ to MCU. He elevated Iron Man which is why it’s still by far the most successful individual franchise for Marvel. Everyone else – Evans, Hemsworth, Rudd – couldn’t match that, not even close. In fact, first IM (No 3D!) opened with almost 100M and finished little above 300M domestically. OTOH, Captain America:First Avenger, Thor and Ant Man had 3D yet opened between 57M and 65M and finished around 180M domestically. That’s a HUGE difference. No, RDJ didn’t open on his own (Marvel brand was bigger draw) but he elevated the boxoffice in a way that Evans/Hemsworth/Rudd couldn’t even though Marvel brand because stronger by the time their respective movies rolled out.
So JLaw is a factor in success in ways that Shailene Woodley isn’t for Divergent ( a book series that sold more books than THG).
Blanchett can win again when she gets rid of her predictable calculated mannerisms that everyone can guess from miles away. Try to give natural as-if-you-aren’t-acting performance for once. Movies aren’t Royal Shakespeare Theater, FFS! Performance like JLaw in Winter Bone. So much for flat acting. That was completely different from her work in AH which falls into obvious acting/ham category that Blanchett repeats over and over.
Movies aren’t Royal Shakespeare Theater, FFS!
Movies can be many things – therein lies the medium’s potential.
But when some actors constantly treat them as RST with their overly mannered acting, pop goes potential. repetitive =/= potential
I hope Brie Larson wins because I really like Room, but if Jennifer Lawrence deserves it and her performance is superior, she should win it. The fact that she won before is not an excuse not to reward a great performance.
Brie larson all the way!! A24 needs some oscars love
Jennifer Lawrence could win again this year! So excited!!!
Uh…………what happened to the whole Best Picture nomination factor? One of the reasons that Davis almost beat Streep (at least, you think that almost happened) is that Davis was the only one of the five Actresses from a film in the Biggest Race. I know we’ve talked “Is a BP nod a factor in acting races?” back and forth (and you’ve talked it back and forth without me, on podcasts), but based on Bullock in The Blind Side and Winslet in The Reader and Lawrence in SLP (none of which, by the way, were foreordained in November, despite what you claim here)…I think we’ve settled on *It’s a Factor*. Perhaps not a determining factor, but not nothing, either. Oscar voters are busy. They try to see all the BP nominees and often shrug their shoulders at the rest, if they or their friends didn’t make it. So they see The Reader because it’s a surprise BP nom, they go against the previous bodies that had Winslet at supporting, and bam she wins.
All of this is to say that I don’t believe Room or Brooklyn or Joy are locks for BP noms. POSSIBLE, of course. I’ve seen the former two, not the latter, because I’m just a simple unfrozen caveman lawyer, I don’t have access to fancy screenings. Room and Brooklyn were outstanding, amazing, fantastic, I was crying at many moments. But certain BP nods? Dunno, especially after the Spirit Awards nominations.
I think it is too early for Lawrence to get #2 or Blanchett to get #3. But I will say that if either Room or Brooklyn gets a BP nod and the other DOES NOT, you can watch as all the gurus of gold migrate their predictions to the one from the film in the Biggest Race.
BP is a factor for predictors only. I constantly read stuff like “can win second only if her movie is undeniable/wins BP” and then I look at second time winners and see no undeniable movie. Streep’s third win was for crapfest that wasn’t even nominated (don’t say “it’s Streep” cause she was denied when her movies were in contention). Waltz’s second wasn’t for BP winner. DDL won second and third for movies that weren’t winners. Blanchett’s second wasn’t for the winner either.
Same goes for first time wins. Actor doesn’t need a BP contender to win. Many didn’t have it and swept all awards. Crap movie, great performance, no problem.
I didn’t say WINNER – obviously if Best Actress needed a winner, no one would have won since 2004. So the Waltz and DDL arguments don’t wash. As for the “BP nom has nothing to do with it,” that case has been made on lots of podcasts, and shot down convincingly, IMHO. Look: if Brie Larson wins EVERY SINGLE PRECURSOR, and Room isn’t nominated, she’ll still win. Call it the Full Blanchett: the Oscars don’t ignore a steamroller, the kind of Julianne Moore-style sweep of 50 of 50 of the pre-awards.
But a BP nom is a factor. It lifted Winslet and Bullock and Lawrence over the competition (and no, they weren’t in WINNERS, I think you missed the argument) – all 3 of those women had lost key awards in December and January. The big counter-argument since 2004 is Streep over Davis in 2011, because only one was in a BP nom. Racism? Weinsteins? Overdue-to-breaking-point? Playing a real person? Great accent? Davis was unknown? Any or all of these six might have put a little more sand on the scale than the “BP nom” factor did. But it still puts sand on the scale, especially in a non-steamroller race, which is what I predict this Best Actress race is going to be.
It’s not just that.. I wish Harvey realizes the power of Mara and campaigns her in lead but maybe it’s too late for that. She’s the film’s soul and heart and it’s such a beautiful and honest performance. Mara should win for that. At least Cannes got that right.
Now that I’ve seen both Brooklyn and Room, I really do think Ronan has a major chance to pull this off. They’re both great, but Ronan has the advantage of Brooklyn being entirely her movie from beginning to end, whereas Room belongs more to Jacob Tremblay than Larson, imo. And Ronan’s character is just so loveable, and the movie is going to be so strong with Academy members- it really seems like something that could hit their sweet spot. And apparently is, according to screening reports. I definitely think Room packs a big emotional punch and that Larson has the more harrowing role for sure, but I don’t know…I feel that they may want to reward Brooklyn with something big. I think this race could be very close. I could see Ronan taking the Globe and BAFTA, for example.
I don’t think so. Ronan is great but she hasn’t a winning role
Agree. Seems to me ROOM is a bigger player for BP than currently anticipated, and Ronan a bigger player than Larson for Actress.
Actually, it’s completely opposite.
Ronan is not going to win, but a nomination isn’t bad. The Best Actress race will be between Jennifer Lawrence and Brie Larson, with Cate Blanchett in third place but I don’t think she will get her third Oscar…
I don’t have a crystal ball like some of you guys, but I’d say that based on word of mouth, superb critical acclaim and Brooklyn being one of those movies that people really love, Ronan has an excellent chance of winning.
I think Brooklyn has the best shot at winning something but the single performances? I don’t know. I think people like Larson, Blanchett and Lawrence give more Oscar worthy performances.
I’ve seen Brooklyn, and it’s true what so many critics and moviegoers are saying; Ronan’s performance is remarkable and just wonderful.
yeah, I don’t see much difference between Ronan and Larson. In fact, Ronan is returning nominee so that helps.
Jlaw is so over hyped it’s ridiculous. She plays in movies men love so she is now the go to girl. X-men, Hunger games, Etc. Once HG is over, her rule will end and I can’t wait. She is beyond stupid and just too hyped! Silver lining was so stupid. She was too young to play the role and she constantly tries to play older women roles. Please stop with all the stupid hype please. These Oscars belong to people who truly deserve it not the popular cheerleader at the time.
Stay pressed, dear!
Plenty of the greats never won/got nominated for an Oscar. They have always been about hype, narrative, studios, and campaign. You have to take all of that into consideration when predicting. Either way Lawrence is in it for the long run.
I totally agree. She is soooo overrated.
You are a sad, strange little man. Jennifer Lawrence is truly great, the best actress of her generation. I don’t need to mention all her incredible performances and her awards and records…She could be winning again for Joy and she will have a long and successful career. Just to drop some names, she will be working with Darren Aronofsky and Steven Spielberg, while continuing to work with David O. Russell. DEAL WITH IT and enjoy this magnificent actress.
Are you 12?
No, you are. “These Oscars belong to people who truly deserve it, not the popular cheerleader”…Do you hear yourself? You are ridiculous.
Always someone who just can’t critique without getting rude and ugly.
her rule won’t end with the end of her franchises because she’s in demand. Best directors want to work with her so get used to seeing a lot of her. That’s reality. I totally understand that overexposure leads to backlash and get where you’re coming from (believe me, I feel the same about Fassbender) . But as of now, her career is in no danger.
Also, if Oscars belonged to those who truly deserved it than there wouldn’t be so many complaints that they got it wrong more often than not. It’s a popularity contest but more of what’s popular with voters (illness! disability! Holocaust! Hammy acting! Weight Loss but not weight gain! Movies about movie industry! Biopics!) hence little variety of winners when you break them down to their essence.
Kind of Sick of Jlaw being over hyped at this pint
Lawrence could easily win again. I predict ROOM will do very well with the Oscars, but Brie Larson is not at all the clear winner. This leaves a nice opening for Ronan to pull an Adrien Brody. And what about Carol?? Should be a very interesting race.
WOW!!
As much as I adored both Ronan and Larson, at this point I don’t see anyone coming close to beating J-Law.
Lol !
It’s Jennifer Lawrence vs Brie Larson. But it’s only Brie’s first nomination and Jennifer Lawrence is coming into the race very strong, with a huge HG success behind her and that famous pay gap essay that was probably the most talked about thing this year…i’m putting my money on Lawrence.
I’d deposit it in the bank instead. At least you’ll still have it come next March!
This is the first time I’m hearing about that essay. Lawrence wrote it? Glad I’m not on twitter.
Paltrow was the it girl when she won. Ronan isn’t (she’s almost unknown)
I just saw Pete Hammond’s reaction to Joy which confirmed what most of us already speculated. I am predicting at least 6 Oscar nominations and the SAG ensemble nod for Joy. It has a strong narrative in a year where we are on the cusp of the first female President and equal pay is a hot news headline.
Lawrence could win again. Swank was awarded twice in a short period of time and from what I see Lawrence is just as beloved by the Academy. As of now, Blanchett is Lawrence’s only real competition. She is formidable as shown by her campaign in the midst of Allen’s bad press. I’m still not sold on Larson as a frontrunner because Oscars are about much more than the performance. She needs that extra push. I don’t underestimate Blunt either. She is one of the most well liked and consistent actresses in Hollywood.
There’s no way TWC will campaign Mara as lead. Vikander will stay supporting or get shut out. I haven’t seen much evidence she’s an “it” girl to the hype machine. Think back to Nyong’o at this point.
I have never heard anyone talk about Alicia Vikander outside of the Internet (Twitter, tumblr specifically). I think she is internet loved, but not so much real world loved. I wonder how that plays with the academy? The Danish Girl isn’t really being talked about outside of film bloggers. I don’t think this is her year. Even if she goes supporting, she will lose to Mara or Fonda.
I actually think Ronan is the front runner. She is rather well known for both Atonement and Hannah and did an incredible job on each of those. And she does equally well in Brooklyn.
I think you also have to factor in a certain amount of Lawrence fatigue at this point also. Her die hard fans are kind of appalling and she is starting to wear thin herself. It will be interesting to see how she fares when she isn’t pushed by Weinstein. American Hustle had 11 noms but couldn’t get any wins. She not only needs DOR, she needs Harvey.
I think Vikander is a great new actress but she does not have the public behind her yet. I don’t know if it will hurt her chances. Redmayne being a good campaign partner/reigning BA winner will benefit her.
I really like Ronan too. I plan to watch Brooklyn next weekend. She is an underrated actress. I think she should work on her interview strategy and nab more press.
Is there Lawrence fatigue? The industry seems to love her more than ever. She was chosen as EW’s Entertainer of the Year. If Joy bombs at the box office that could signify audience fatigue, but she still seems well liked among her peers. She’s only 25 and could possibly be looking at a 4th Oscar nomination. It’s a rarity.
Check out youtube. Ronan is doing (and has done) loads of press interviews and chat shows.
I have and I like her accent and humbleness. I just meant she only lacks mainstream press. Brooklyn’s top 10 box finish is a sign she will soon become more famous.
Lupita Nyong’o was a relative newcomer when she won for 12YAS. And that was her only film that year – Vikander has 4 in 2015 alone. Clearly the industry has taken note of her – give it time, she’ll be a household name yet.
She’s also well known for one of last year’s most liked Best Picture nominees, Wes Anderson’s The Grand Budapest Hotel.
Hammond loves everything. 🙂
He has a pretty good record of predicting what the Academy will nominate. Although he was off the mark with Nightcrawler and Aniston last year.
He’s good at predicting what the Academy will nominate. Although he was way off the mark last year with Nightcrawler and Aniston’s chances.
“It’s not impossible, but to win a second she is going to have top Silver
Linings Playbook. That year, she was unstoppable as the fresh new face
in Hollywood. It’s hard to pull that rabbit out of the hat twice.” Lawrence doesn’t need to be a fresh face to top Silver Linings. She’s now one of the biggest star in the world. Her position is better
Larson’s performance was certainly the best thing about Room, but I wouldn’t look back at it and consider it an Academy-worthy performance. It just doesn’t fit the bill for me. Great post!
So now with the enthusiastic reactions to Jennifer Lawrence in “Joy”, we now have a double, almost a doppelganger situation.In that could Eddie Redmayne win again in Best Actor? I think his is a towering, unforgettable performance. surpassing even what he did as Stephen Hawking in his FIRST Oscar winner “The Theory of Everything.”.
People are thinking that Leonardo has only ten lines of dialogue in “The Revenant” (which means “ghost” in French, btw) Is that enough of a performance to warrant an Oscar or will it just be seen as stunt work? The film is two and a half hours of gore. Is that too much for the mostly conservative Academy members? And PS, Leo is not liked. It’s true. He’s too rich, too young(Still) and too arrogant.They may make him wait like they did with Al Pacino and Paul Newman? Same with Johnny Depp.And I don’t think either of them cares THAT much.
And so they could cancel each other out, Leo and Depp, and leave the door open for Eddie Redmayne to win his second Oscar in a row. Jennifer Lawrence’s coming on so strong, as we knew she would, is going to make voters consider that the SECOND Oscar is not so hard to award when you have such talented young performers to seriously consider.
Eddie and Jennifer could make history here.
You are right about the steak eaters not liking DiCaprio. I think they find his personal lifestyle distasteful. He has never seemed arrogant.
The biggest surprise for me is that Depp is campaigning. He’s one of the most private big stars in the world, but now he’s going out of his way to be seen with his wife and talking about his children.
“The biggest surprise for me is that Depp is campaigning.”
Well, besides being the most consistently overrated actor of his (or any) generation, he has a funny way of having it both ways. A shameless moneymaker on the one hand, a mensch and an artist on the other. Not caring about the Oscars, doing everything it takes to get one… Depp is that rare thing: a boring enigma.
was going to come in here to defend depp, i do like his as a personality but man, his films are a little underwhelming, those that i have seen. i think i like the idea of depp more than i like what he prodcues on screen.
I have nothing against Depp. I just can’t remember him ever trying this hard to win an award.
Shut up about eddie redmayne. It’s not happeing.
Give me a break, Stephen. Nobody cares about The Danish Girl. I don’t even disagree that Redmayne will get a nomination because he is one of the most shameless campaigners in the game today, but there is zero percent chance that it goes beyond a nomination (we’ll call it the “A for Effort” slot).
There is no other real contender in the Best Actor race other than Leo. And that may even piss me off because aside from the other eventual nominees (any 4 of Redmayne, Caine, Fassbender, Damon, Depp, Hanks, Smith and Carell) there are a bunch of great performances that will get snubbed this year (specifically Mendelsohn in Mississippi Grind, Jackson in Hateful Eight, Jordan in Creed and Hardy in Legend). But there are very few actors on the planet that currently deserve an Oscar more than Dicaprio. Overdue, in a movie directed by last year’s golden boy, where he got dirtied up and went full “method”, competing in a field that has no other clear frontrunner. You’re absolutely out of your mind (or you personally have it in for Leo) if you think this isn’t his prize to walk away with.
I agree, Chris. I’m too exhausted to dismantle this wacky “Nobody likes Leo” fallacy but I will do it in the morning. Stay tuned.
started out not liking leo, for the exact reasons most people give, but honesty, ive warmed to hima lot. seems humble and his filmography is probably the most impresive of any youngish male star actor out there.
Very amusing. You obviously haven’t seen THE DANISH GIRL as both Stephen and I have. You have no clue what you are talking about.
Chris, +1
There are countless comments from me on this site expecting great things from Redmayne–now, these days, taking part on the next goddamn Harry Potter franchise represents a return to “good work” for me. How things turn out. The only thing about giving me pause about Leo’s win is that critics who have seen it seem genuinely divided about THE REVENANT as a whole–or let me rephrase, the critics *I* pay attention to seem divided, but then again that was the case for BP winner BIRDMAN; so all that rumpus should be nicely overridden once the aggregation industrial complex performs its magic trick (e.g., BIRDMAN 92% RT 88 MC)
If Oscars were only about performances DiCaprio should have at least 2 by now. I think he’s one of the greatest living actors, but I’m not an Academy member. DiCaprio is not a lock for the win when they have more easily accepted (by their standards) choices in the race.
————People are thinking that Leonardo has only ten lines of dialogue in “The Revenant”
That didn’t stop Marlee Matlin or Holly Hunter.