Now that the awards pundits and tastemakers have seen Ridley Scott’s House of Gucci, the conversation is swirling around Best Actress. It is admirable that Ridley Scott has turned out two epics that are both two and a half hours long and are both interesting deep dives based on true stories. In my opinion, the stronger film is The Last Duel. It is better written, better acted, and better as a whole. But for many mainstream moviegoers it is probably not as “fun” as House of Gucci and when people are feeling despairing, they might opt for “fun” over something as serious as The Last Duel.
Regarding the two films’ respective Best Actress hopefuls, Jodie Comer is the more skilled actress whereas Lady Gaga is the bigger star with a magnetic red carpet appeal. Acting is not as easy as it looks, it turns out. Some people can just drop into it and be great at it — for others, it’s a work in progress. We’re seeing a few performances this year by non-actors. The critics seem to prefer these more naturalized performances. But I just don’t know how the actors will feel. Gaga does seem like perfect casting and much of this role is perfect for her. She’s funny, sexy, focused, and mean. But in the film’s second half, she is given the harder job of deep emotions. Some of it lands, some of it doesn’t — maybe it will matter, maybe it won’t. It’s hard to say right now.
Lady Gaga was beloved and nominated for her first big role in A Star Is Born. In fact, Ridley Scott said that is why he wanted her for this role. She has many good scenes in House of Gucci, and is at her best when she gets to be a “bad” character. But the film seems to want to have it both ways: for us to sympathize with her character but also depict her as a conniving villain. Gaga herself does not seem to know where to go with that ultimately, though the film seems to be landing on a crime of passion and a broken heart rather than a power grab.
Gaga’s pure star power should get her pretty close to the race, and she is probably looking at a nomination, depending on how voters like the film overall. She would not be the first big star whose real-life presence infused her acting: Cher and Barbra Streisand are two who did it before her. Madonna was never quite able to make the jump. Gaga is somewhere between Streisand and Madonna, but in Gucci she leans a wee bit towards Madonna. That’s not a bad thing necessarily, but it’s a question of how the actors will feel about it.
Either which way, Gaga does not seem to be (at least right now) a threat to the frontrunner, Kristen Stewart. In my humble opinion, the biggest threat to Stewart comes from a different singer/actress , Jennifer Hudson, who plays Aretha Franklin in Respect.
Unlike Gaga in Gucci, Hudson is playing a singer, which is more her wheelhouse. When you hear her sing in the film, it is absolutely transformational. If House of Gucci had been a musical, Gaga could have busted out her magnificent pipes and it would have taken her further. Either way, it still seems like the red hot/on fire frontrunner is Stewart, and that is due in large part to her marketing team, who are doing a great job with Spencer.
I wish I could say that Jodie Comer would be one of the five. In all ways, The Last Duel is the better film of the two Ridley Scott movies, but House of Gucci seems to have more buzz (at least online, for what that’s worth). The Last Duel could only really be a player if the Golden Globes elevate it, because the critics will not. They are much more likely (and trust me on this because I know) to go for House of Gucci.
Olivia Colman also seems to be picking up heat for The Lost Daughter and has the kick-ass Netflix marketing team behind her, so that also seems to be very nearly a lock at this point.
Another one to watch is Penelope Cruz in Parallel Mothers. So far, only Jeff Wells at Hollywood Elsewhere is championing her as the frontrunner. But if the movie is as good as everyone says it is, Cruz is probably in.
So it’s possible, at least from what we know right now, that Best Actress is looking like this:
1. Kristen Stewart, Spencer
2. Jennifer Hudson, Respect
3. Penelope Cruz, Parallel Mothers
4. Frances McDormand, The Tragedy of Macbeth
5. Lady Gaga, House of Gucci or Olivia Colman, The Lost Daughter, or Jodie Comer, The Last Duel or Jessica Chastain in The Eyes of Tammy Faye
It really is going to be a tough competition in Best Actress and I would not be surprised if the voters iced out Hudson to make room for Colman, but I do think these named here are your main contenders. We’re still waiting on Rachel Zegler in West Side Story and Jennifer Lawrence in Don’t Look Up.
In terms of Best Picture, The Tragedy of Macbeth, House of Gucci, and maybe The Last Duel seem to have more of a shot than the others. If Spencer makes it in, then we know for sure it’s a done deal. What I’m wondering about Spencer is what the British voters are going to think about it. Are they going to be supportive of its take on the whole story? Are they going to be prickly about it? We just don’t know. But what we do know is that BAFTA is very influential on the voting Academy.
Over at AwardsWatch, Erik Anderson has taken both Jennifer Hudson and Lady Gaga out of his predictions:
BEST ACTRESS
1. Kristen Stewart – Spencer (NEON)
2. Frances McDormand – The Tragedy of Macbeth (A24/Apple)
3. Penélope Cruz – Parallel Mothers (Sony Pictures Classics)
4. Olivia Colman – The Lost Daughter (Netflix)
5. Jessica Chastain – The Eyes of Tammy Faye (Searchlight Pictures)
Over at Gold Derby, the predictions are kind of all over the place, but Jazz Tangcay does have Gaga in the top spot.
I understand that the way I am reading the race is different from the pundits. The reason is that I don’t really follow Film Twitter or anyone else to anticipate how I think the race is going to go. I’m trying to look more broadly. Erik here has predicted all five Best Actress contenders to be white. Now, in 2021, after all of the mandates and directives and changes to the industry and the country, does anyone REALLY think it’s going to go that way? Because I’m pretty sure it won’t go that way.
I suppose it is possible, but now imagine BAFTA. Their members don’t even pick their nominees but you can bet they won’t be picking all-white nominees, so there is a chance that maybe one or two of Erik’s list will be on BAFTA’s list. Who knows what actresses will be on there or whether they can build a consensus out of that, but if Jennifer Hudson lands on that list and the Globes? Well, now you’ll see some hard core momentum heading into Oscar night.
You are very astute ,Sasha Stone to see that Jennifer Hudson is Stewart’s real competition. “The Queen vs the Princess” the headlines will read. With the 15th anniversary of her win for “Dreamgirls”, the universal love for Aretha Franklin, the unfortunate 20th anniversary of Halle Berry being the only WOC in 93 years of the Oscars to win Best actress, Jennifer being loved by Oscar voters, being picked by Franklin herself to play her, this role is Oscar gold and Jennifer’s strongest performance beyond the singing. She and Carole King wrote a song for the film and that win is the main thing that could prevent Hudson’s win since they may just award her for the song alone.
Holy shit does The Tragedy of Macbeth look absolutely mesmerizing. Very short trailer but the dazzling shots and foreboding voiceover completely sold me. Frances looks to be doing it again. Cannot wait.
Sasha, pretty please, don’t refer to Gaga as the undisputed frontrunner at all this season. A few years ago you titled an October article “A Star Is Born Becomes Titanic, Too Big to Fail and Official Oscar Frontrunner for Best Picture”. I know you were just kinda over it, and wanted to get people talking about other movies… but please just be objective as possible lol, I love the ways you nudge the conversation this way or that way, but I would very much enjoy seeing Gaga get nominated 😀
I don’t think labeling Gaga as a front runner ever came across Sasha’s mind. Lol.
What are some of the group’s thoughts on Alana Haim’s Oscar Buzz for Licorice Pizza?
She will probably get a Golden Globe nomination but for a relative unknown this late in the game, her film would have to be a proper top3-5 BP / BD contender for her to make a dent in the Best Actress race.
I haven’t heard much, but for a relative newcomer she’s not popping through. Idk if that’s on her part or if the field is way too stacked: it’s always an uphill battle for an ingenue to find her wings and soar during awards season.
Gaga, Stewart (win), Hudson, Cruz and McDormand
I think it’s actually possible for everyone on that list (except Stewart) to miss it at the end.
Agreed, Stewart seems to be the only actual lock so far. Hudson is losing steam and McDormand just came off a major win. The more I look at it Gaga seems to only have the Globes in her favor and not much else.
Yeah, sorry Don’t agree about Gaga. She is talented. She studied acting at one of the best HS in Manhattan. She is certainly LIGHT YEARS away from Madonna. her turn in A Star is Born was beautiful. I don’t need big dramatic acting to turn me on – I like small, quiet and interesting . I look forward to seeing her rise – beyond BIG STARDOM. I was watching Streisand last night in The Way we Were – she’s not a great actress. Cher was not a great actress. Gaga could become a great actress with time. and Madonna – well Madonna just sucked.
A24 has confirmed that Frances McDormand is to be put in the Lead Actress. It’s on their FYC page.
Lady Macbeth is n0t a lead r0le ! That r0le has 265 lines in the play as 0pp0sed t0 719 lines f0r Macbeth ! !
also tired of seeing the same actresses up for the lead – mcDormand is a lovely actress . She is talented beyond. but winning her last Oscar – I was like – come on – and frankly so was she.
Neither was Hopkins in The Silence Of The Lambs and for that matter Marlon Brando in The Godfather. Actors have run in the “wrong” category for decades to increase their chances of winning, and without a hard rule defining “leading” and “supporting” roles, it’s not going to stop anytime soon.
It’s a good strategy. It also opens the way for Kathryn Hunter to be nominated in supporting.
That would be the best thing to happen to the Oscars this year.
Agreed. Haven’t seen Tragedy of Macbeth, but I have watched Kathryn Hunter’s performance once on YouTube. She’s magnificent.
I love The Last Duel (I’m a Ridley stan who likes all his films), but I don’t necessarily think there were any Oscar performances in there, including Comer. They were all good (even Affleck and Damon), but it’s just one of those Ridley Scott films that doesn’t scream performance nominations to me. There was nothing here remotely close to a Susan Sarandon or Russell Crowe Maximus or whatever, it just did the job required. House of Gucci seems a bit more showy, they might get a campaign going there, but Comer is just fine in my eyes.
Can I just say that Crowe SHOULD have gotten an award for The Insider – his best performance to date. He IS the Richard Burton of his generation.
In a perfect world the winner (from what I have seen this year so far) would be Françoise Lebrun. She was incredible in Vortex. What a film.
I’m merely a spectator and not an expert.
But, I refuse to believe Kristen Stewart who has a well documented history of being a prickly public figure is winning an Oscar before Jessica Chastain, who has an impeccable history and long overdue.
Also, I think Rachel Ziegler and the WSS/Spielberg team is getting ready to crash the party hard! I follow Ziegler and Ariana DeBose on everything and they are extremely well packaged and very well liked. They are beautiful and charming and educated in interviews. If they knock it out with there performances, and kill it on the circuit, this becomes a whole different narrative.
Also, we still have Nicole Kidman and Halle Berry.
I’m sure Stewart will be nominated and no doubt the movie will be a hit, I’m just not ready to call her for a win, just yet.
Pfeiffer, Close, Huppert, are overdue so I refuse to buy the narrative that Chastain is long “overdue”. Filmography-wise personally speaking, I think both Chastain and Stewart are almost the the same. For every Zero Dark Thirty, The Tree of Life, Crimson Peak, and A Most Violent Year, there’s Panic Room, On the Road, Cloud of Sils Maria, Personal Shopper, Certain Women, and even Cafe Society. Both also have their own mainstream misfires. But not only is Spencer a thousand miles better film than The Eyes of Tammy Faye, Stewart gave one of the best performances, if not the best of this year.
Andra Day was the best of the year last year and we all saw how that turned out.
Andra Day went nowhere because it wasn’t strong enough. There was far stronger contender 2020 let’s be real.
I actually think it was a toss between Kirby and Mulligan as the best among the nominees last year. But McDormand is her film so I kinda understand why she won. For me, Pfeiffer’s was the best performance of 2020.
Agreed!
Soooo agree with your initial statement. I too thought his over due thinkin was ludicrous. Hell look at Amy Adams for gods sakes. Guy doesn’t know much about film or the Academy Awards.
All the stars are aligning for Stewart’s campaign (raves for her, strong reviews for the film, respectable BO, Oscar friendly release date) and they are just not for Chastain’s (weak reviews for the film, weak BO, too early release date), that’s why Stewart is ranked higher in predictions everywhere.
And I say this as a big Chastain fan. She should have 7 nominations and 2 wins already. But objectively speaking, this season of hers will be tricky. I hope she makes the cut but based on precedent it looks almost impossible for her to win. I think only three actresses won with those kind of critical scores in recent memory and 2 of the 3 still got BP nominations (The Reader, The Blind Side) and all 3 were international BO hits (The Iron Lady being the third).
Chastain doesn’t have either of those luxuries (BP nod, strong BO) to fall back on. I still hope she makes the cut but I don’t see her winning. Not this season.
I agree with you about Chastain. She should be a 2 time winner already! And I agree it would be a tough season for her. I just feel like Stewart is ripe for a backlash at some point. And I think that benefits Chastain. It’s a long season.
There was a 7-year period when Chastain would have deserved an Oscar nomination / win literally every year.
2011 – The Tree of Life + The Help
2012 – Zero Dark Thirty
2013 – The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby
2014 – A Most Violent Year
2015 – Crimson Peak
2016 – Miss Sloane
2017 – Molly’s Game
My personal favourites are The Disappearance of Eleanor Rigby and The Tree of Life but at the same time I am also stunned she wasn’t even in consideration with Crimson Peak, and couldn’t make the cut with STELLAR lead performances in Miss Sloane and Molly’s Game, either of which should have easily garnered her the damn Oscar let alone the nomination(s).
P.S. I don’t see a viable Stewart backlash happening. Some Gaga fans tried on Twitter but it is simply not sticking. With good reason.
Crimson Peak had the misfortune of coming out before the Academy decided that they like del Toro after all. I agree that Chastain was great (but she’s always great).
I have said this around here for months—it is a small minority opinion.
100% won’t be shocked if she is snubbed, everyone outside of that thinking will lose their minds cause they think she is winning it.
Cruz and Kidman are the ones to watch out for. There are still so many unknowns in this category. Crazy year for Best Actress!
I think the last few years have taught us that there isn’t a massive difference between winning a category and just missing out on a nomination. People may well predict Stewart to win while also acknowledging that she might not even get nominated.
True….but most people think Stewart is locked in for a nomination—to the point that they will be shook if she isn’t nominated.
She’s actually been doing the rounds and has been far from prickly in all her Spencer interviews. She’s gunning for it something the academy likes to see. Jessica Chastain is great but your logic of an actress getting an Oscar before someone who in your eyes is past due is dumb. She’s a marvelous actress her day will come. On top of that I haven’t seen Chastain campaigning as much as Stewart. Don’t be fooled this is a 3 way race between Stewart, Gaga, and Hudson w a major dark horse in Jodie Comer. Not an expert here but I score 80-90 @ the oscars every year usually missing 2 or 3.
Prickly is a great word. More original then the word dumb.
Are you describing a cactus? Vapid is what you are, how’s that one work for
You? Get lost. People like you always wanting to run your mouth when you need shut your yk what up. I’m not about cuss on here but instead of your weak 2 sentences atleast come back with an intelligent rebuttal. Mad you had nothing to say other than the fact you used the word prickly. Please. Lmao
Don´t forget Penelope Cruz – I think she has a better shot than Gaga and Hudson.
I love Penelope Cruz but I’ve yet to catch her film. Will be doing so soon and will shuffle accordingly.
Hey Sasha it’s Nixon, I’ve been an avid reader and fan of your site since 2009. Back then you and I had a pretty fierce debate on Avatar vs The Hurt Locker. Always loved you for that, in many ways that was the catalyst that made me super involved in the oscars, I’ve won every pool for the past 5 yrs and I think I’m pretty good at putting my finger on the winner. I normally score a 80-90, foreign and short subject always stump me the most. Lol. Anyways I wanted to ask what your thoughts on Tessa Thompson and Ruth Negga in Passing are? Do you think they could surge? & one other thing I do also really want Jodie Comer to get in for her devastating yet layered and very complicated performance. I can see the globes going for her which hopefully gives her the boost she needs.
Jodie Comer is a Bafta darling (she won for Killing Eve awfully fast) so I think she could score her first Bafta nomination on the film side this season and that could go a long way as far as perception of her chances goes. As a TV icon, SAG voters (most of them working in television) will probably support her, as well.
Yes I believe there will be a lot of the bigger awards bodies that will congress around Comer. I do believe that if she gets the bafta nom which more likely than Gaga lets be real (the reviews are thus far not spectacular) and if she gets the sag it’ll be a done dealZ her performance is far more intricate that learning an accent. She has to portray 3 roles of her self through the eyes of 2 men and the truth . It’s great work.
I will be honest, the only major nomination I expect Gaga to receive this season is a Golden Globe nod. I do not expect the reviews for the film (arriving only 2 days before the release date, never a good sign) to support a proper Oscar campaign in any of the main categories. I could be wrong of course, especially if the film surprises with critics (60+ MC would be a surprise to me at this point) and audiences (20M+ OW I think is the over/under here) but for now I don’t have high hopes for this campaign.
Very true, 2 days before is a the mark of ow confidence and I actually 10% agree w you. I do think now her only nomination this year will be at the globes.
Sorkin just put his foot in his mouth. I hope it won’t affect Kidman’s chances but it is definitely a PR issue now.
I actually did not fully understand his opinion (English is not my first language). Can you clarify, please? From what I understood, he said a gay person can’t play straight and vice versa. Also, a spaniard can’t play latino? Is that what he meant?
He basically said he doesn’t consider it a problem that a Latino character (Cuban) was played by a European (Spanish) actor and this statement of his clearly rubbed the Latinx community the wrong way especially when he added other dumb stuff like “Brazilians are not latino” and just to put the final nail in the coffin of the interview, he also brought up straight / gay casting choices even though that wasn’t even relevant here. Just very classic “foot in the mouth” interview. Shocking from a smart guy like him.
Can you explain what he actually meant by his gay comment? I literally cannot understand it after reading it multiple times. Is he anti-“straightactorsplayinggaycharacters” or pro?
He is pro. He essentially sad that straight actors should be allowed to play gay roles. It wasn’t even relevant in the context of this interview. For the record I agree with that sentiment because this would be a two-way street then : if straight actors can play gay roles then gay actors should be able to play straight roles, too, and latter rarely ever happens in Hollywood and when it does, it is always a headline. Ridiculous.
I agree with him then (strongly), but what does he mean by gay not being “actable”?
This is just how I read it but it read to me like the idea behind the “actable” phrase is that if someone were to play for example gay or straight, there is no specific thing within those nouns (as Sorkin puts it) that can be defined through acting choices. Thus a person playing someone whose sexual orientation is the same as their own wouldn’t be able to play that character better or more exactly in relation to that sexual orientation than someone who isn’t of the same sexual orientation. So basically something along the lines that there isn’t one type of person or performance for any sexual orientation and thus anyone’s interpretation of a person playing someone of a sexual orientation shouldn’t be considered inaccurate. All this reads to me as Sorkin probably just not quite getting the argumentation behind the idea that gay characters should only be played by gay actors (I personally agree with Phantom, I’m all for straight actors playing gay characters as long as it means the complete eradication of observing the sexual orientation of an actor in casting and not just that straight actors get to play everyone while no one else gets to play anyone).
Thanks for clearing that up. I guess he arrives at the right conclusion – although I don’t think I would agree with what he implies, that acting to be gay is essentially just acting to be attracted to someone of the same sex, which I don’t think is entirely true.
I actually don’t think he argues that (I think my phrasing of “sexual orientation” might have been misleading, it was meant to be just a generalization of phrases like straight or gay) but that for example “a person who’s from a certain country/is of a certain sexual orientation” is too abstract a notion for it to be one thing you play or a specific style of performance and that there’s no right or wrong way to play someone who’s Spanish or Cuban or British or American or gay or straight, since it’s millions of people who all are different and complex people and thus would be played differently. Which is true in theory but I feel kind of misses the point.
Why I thought this is this line: “Gay and straight aren’t actable. You could act being attracted to someone, but most nouns aren’t actable.”
It seems to me that in his view, acting to be a gay person means that you act to be attracted to someone of the same sex, since you cannot “act” to be “gay” (holistically).
Anyway, this is veering into speculation at this point.
The way I read that line was that attraction is actable but acting attraction is not the same as acting a sexual orientation because sexual orientation and thus someone who is of a certain sexual orientation isn’t distinctly actable. But yes, this is pretty much just speculation.
Wow, ok, thank you for explainig. Thats really… dumb. Even if he thinks that, he did not have to say it out loud, especially right before his movie comes out.
Is this also partially over Bardem being cast to play a Cuban-American? I really, really have to say, that is just … SUCH a particularly silly controversy
I don’t think the controversy will stick. The Sorkin comments were ignorant and deserved to be called out but will be probably forgotten by next week. I am just stunned he didn’t have a publicist / pricey Amazon awards campaign strategist on standby to stop such an embarrassing interview.
Yeah, I should put “controversy” in scare quotes. Really it’s a tiny handful of people on twitter with tweets getting at most a couple dozen likes – hardly a major issue in the hispanic community. I just think it’s silly, and I actually think it’s silly from a “woke” point of view (and from my point of view a Cuban American). Arnaz was born in Cuba … to an extremely inter-generationally-wealthy, socially and politically elite, large land-owning family whose ancestry was … Spanish. Arnaz was NOT representative of probably even 99 percent of Latinx people in America if one takes into account both race and class (even though he was and still is especially adored in the Cuban-American community for obvious reasons). To think otherwise is to be, honestly, (and a bit offensively) essentializing, and also just slightly ignorant (though I don’t blame anyone for this) of Cuban history/society/culture. In fact, if Arnaz was alive right now, knowing his politics and that of Cuban Americans more generally, he would most likely (like most Cuban exiles, my family unfortunately included) not only be against the “woke” latinx backlash to Bardem’s casting, he would probably be (and I mean this in the worst way possible) proud that a Spaniard was playing him (yeah, and it would be as racist and elitist a sort of pride as it sounds). In fact, I almost wish a different Latin American were playing him, just to spite the racist Cubans. But as it stands, Bardem’s casting is about as egregious as DDL playing Lincoln (or, for that matter, Australian Kidman playing Ball).
And this is why you would have been considerably better suited to answer that question than Sorkin was. He should have given this very informed and insightful take instead of the one he did.
Yeah … I’m actually kind of shocked he didn’t already have a neat fool-proof response to that question on stand-by.
… or if he didn’t at least a publicist should have. I mean ffs what happened, did the Amazon check not clear or something ?
Right? It’s crazy they let him embarrass himself that way. And I agree with you, alexsh’s comment was so eloquently put and insightful that I wish he had answered in Sorkin’s behalf lol
aw thank you heheh – to be clear, I would definitely have supported casting a Cuban-American for this particular role, at least for the sake of what little sentimentality I have left for the Cuban-American community and I Love Lucy/Ricky Ricardo’s place in it, but I also do not think that this casting was a “bad” or insensitive decision by literally any means with respect to identity issues. It will only be bad if Bardem simply doesn’t do well in terms of his acting (and honestly I’m not too convinced by the trailer)
Love Javier though – I wish he makes the role justice.
This is all s0 incredibly stupid ! H0w ab0ut casting the best pers0n f0r the r0le ! S0 Peter Dinklage sh0uld n0t play Cyran0 0r Richard III and James Caan sh0uld n0t have played S0nny C0rle0ne , but it’s 0k t0 cast Black and Hispanic act0rs as the F0unding Fathers in Hamilt0n but a white act0r like Welles , 0livier 0r H0pkins can’t ever play a certain M00r 0f Venice and Denzel Washingt0n sh0uld n0t be playing Macbeth! Wh0 cares if Bardem is Spanish and n0t Cuban and T0m Hanks isn’t gay 0r retarded but w0n tw0 0scars f0r Philadelphia and F0rrest Gump and Al Pacin0 wasn’t Blind in Scent 0f a W0man , Daniel Day – Lewis didn’t really need a wheel chair in My Left F00t and Patty Duke sh0uld n0t have w0n an )scar f0r The Miracle W0rker because she was n0t really hard 0f hearing and she c0uld see . And last but certainly n0t least J0hn Hurt when he played J0hn Merrick was n0t really an Elephant in The Elephant Man ! !
… well, this ain’t it either
Dude you are so off base here with Hamilton. It was written by a latinx male and he was doing a rap musical – and making a point . We know that Hamilton’s mom was Jamaican. I thought it was clever and fun. But when you get Hopkins to do black face iwth so many black actors out there — it’s lazy. You are barking up a white man’s tree. As we became more self aware we realized Hey I can cast a blind woman to play Helen Keller Hey I can get a guy who really has cerebal palsey to do thi s- but I guess they wanted a great actor who cold act it. And as far as Hamilton is concerned – it’s not about wokeness – it’s about the creative impetus of a writer who deliberately wrote for black actors. Founding fathers of this country, btw, were native american peoples. So there’s that.
Dude y0u c0nveniently missed my wh0le p0int ! I*n the nineteenth century there was a black American Shakespearian actt0r by the name 0f Ira Aldridge . Y0u’ve pr0bably never heard 0f him . His m0st fam0us r0les were Aar0n in Titus Andr0nicus , 0thell0 , Shyl0ck in Merchant 0f Venice , Macbeth , Hamlet , Richard the Third and King Lear . The first tw0 characters were black ! Sh0uld he have been all0wed t0 play the 0ther five ? Asking f0r a friend .
funny story here I was dating a cuban – his mother said ‘you know we are SPANISH” European white. Not like THEM. The Latinx community as well as communities of color – think the lighter you are – the more european – the better.
Lol, I see you’ve met my family. It’s not a good look.
And it’s a very fascinating case of cognitive dissonance. On the one hand, I do think it’s important for people to learn more about race in Latin America, and how f*cked up it is. When Cubans talk about being white, they’re not necessarily making things up, in a Latin-American context; white Latinos (e.g., entirely or mostly of European heritage) benefit from a LOT of privilege in Latin America, which is often intensely racist … in many cases, this privilege translates to white latinx people in America, many of whom can pretty easily “pass” for white. But at the same time, most of these people ARE racialized as people of color in America – that’s just how we’re perceived, obviously. When I personally walk down the street, I might come off as ethnically ambiguous (I actually mostly get mistaken for Middle Eastern myself), but I’m generally never white-passing, unless I’m traveling around somewhere like Spain or Greece where I pretty seamlessly blend in.
But, given that most Cubans ARE perceived as being of color in America – regardless of their racial background or identity back home in Cuba – you’d think more of them would be a little less … I don’t know … racist, Trump-loving, trying-so-hard-to-pass-for-white, etc. etc. Unfortunately, the Marco Rubios of the world are pretty much exactly what you get in most (of course, not all) of the Cuban-American community.
The family also supported someone who was calling up a guy who was doing a pro castro play and threatening him – I said “but you left Cuba because you wanted freedom, and now you’re infringing on his – threatening his life?” They didn’t understand. Needless to say, it we could not make it work. Great guy tho. Marco is terrible Ted is terrible they both are – I hate to say it – the rule not the exception when it comes to Latin xers.
Oh don’t even get me started on the Castro stuff lol. My family full-on thinks I’m a card-carrying communist because I like, believe in universal healthcare and idk, voting rights. Not that I think being a communist is a bad thing (although unlike most other leftists/socialists I’ve encountered online, I actually don’t think Castro was a good guy … for leftist reasons lol). But my family would disown me if I said that to their faces. You should have seen them when I told them I support Bernie, lol. They get along scarily well with conservative white Americans
Bardem does not look good in this – so many actors he could have used – but let’s face it – come on – it’s pasture time for Sorkin in the awards world. He’s a small screen guy.
what happened?
I really think Kidman, Berry and Mara are the late breakers that could change the race so far.
For now in order of likeliest:
Stewart
Cruz
Colman
Chastain
Comer
Comer over Gaga? Put down the keyboard and back away.
Kidman.
I believe people are seriously underestimating Nicole.
Why do you think she has a very good shot? Honestly, her voice-over in the trailer wasn’t all that great at all. My opinion only. Clearly no one knows anything at this stage.
Sascha: Lady Macbeth is n0t a leading r0le ! If she deserves a n0minati0n it’s f0r supp0rting actress ! In the play she has 265 lines as 0pp0sed t0 the 719 lines that her husband has ! !
It should be ranked as criminal to have a Best Actress lineup this year without Jessica Chastain’s mesmerizing work in The Eyes Of Tammy Faye. Liking the film or not, she gave one hell of a performance once again and the possibility of watching her being robbed of a nomination once again makes me furious. Not only she’s overdue for a win let alone a third nomination, she delivered my favorite female performance of the year thus far.
Well said.
I love Ms Chastain. But I was personally underwhelmed. It was a rather forgettable performance for me, in large part hampered by how conventional and dull the film is. My opinion only.
In case anyone else is monitoring official early word / first social media reactions / reviews of the yet-unseen contenders, the next two weeks will be quite the doozy :
10 November – tick tick … BOOM! (AFI premiere + social / review embargo)
11 November – Licorice Pizza (social media embargo)
12 November – Swan Song (AFI premiere + social / review embargo)
13 November – Bruised (AFI premiere + social / review embargo)
16 November – Being the Ricardos (NY screening + Q&A + social embargo most likely)
17 November – Don’t Look Up (Bafta LA Screening + Q&A + social embargo most likely)
24 November – The Unforgivable (theatrical release + social / review embargo that week)
22 November – House of Gucci (review embargo)
This would leave only Nightmare Alley and West Side Story, both are rumoured to start screening in early December odd since both will be also in wide release by mid-December . Also curious considering both have wrapped a while ago, Nightmare Alley a year ago (December 2020) and West Side Story over 2 years ago (September 2019) so the super late screening start doesn’t seem like a post-prod timetable issue, more like a strategic decision.
December 1st (NA screening) is only day before New York critics vote, right?
But I don’t think it’s late screening is purely strategic move. Desplat dropped out due to scheduling conflict (which was probably the main reason why it missed the fall festivals) and some techy things needed more time.
I don’t expect to see them recognised by the NYFCC anyway. By the way, I was thinking: Can the NYFCC go crazy with something like giving Best Supporting Actor to Daniel Kaluuya for Judas?
Wasn’t Judas last year?
Judas and the Black Messiah premiered in 2021 and thus critics’ groups that didn’t imitate the Oscar’s timetable change didn’t consider it for their 2020 awards and could award it this year (even if I don’t think they would go out of their way to award a performance that they know already has an Oscar)
So apparently Tick Tick Boom is great and Garfield is a contender for Best Actor… These late-breakers really messing up my predictions/expectations.
I saw, what is a bit of a surprise to me, that the film is getting strong notices, too, not just Garfield. I expected latter but low-key expected mixed-positive for former.
So could this mean that the Best Actor quintet is spoken for ? Will Smith, Denzel Washington, Benedict Cumberbatch, Peter Dinklage, Andrew Garfield with Jude Hill as a possibility IF the Academy goes apeshit for Belfast ?
Bardem is also a strong possibility at this point at least, meaning that one of the people who everyone considers “safe” at this point could drop out (if Garfield does get nominated, I think it’s probably Dinklage who doesn’t get in)
Right now from that quintet I agree that Dinklage seems to be the shakiest but I think that could change once more people see the film and his immense industry support kicks in. For example as a TV icon, I could easily see him surprise with a SAG win later on considering most of the SAG voters work in TV. We’ll see.
But it’s also two musical performances and I feel like those can easily lumped together
That is a solid point, as well. Also how odd that everyone assumed West Side Story will kick In the Heights out of BP when it could easily just be tick, tick … BOOM.
I remember hearing something about tick, tick… Boom! being good around August and was surprised that everyone just assumed it wouldn’t be any good. However, I don’t think that those reactions read like the reactions to a best picture nominee (the reactions seemed very theater-focused with stuff like “here is Jonathan Larson embodied” and “Look, Bradley Whitford as Sondheim” which might not really work for Academy members and even for example the title of The Independent’s review, referring to it as the ultimate defense of theater kids, doesn’t sound like an Academy movie per se)
How odd that everyone assumed West Side Story is going to do well despite being a remake of a classic and beloved Hollywood film? I mean, would like to be proven wrong and I’ll still see it when it opens in cinemas, but do we really need a remake of that?
Remaking a classic is always a fool’s errand, I only consider this attempt warranted because at last the Latinx characters will be played by Latinx actors and it could be an unprecedented acting showcase for young, relatively unknown Latina actresses. I will see it, as well, but I am cautiously optimistic at this point. Wrapped filming 26 months ago and zero fall festival presence ? Not a good sign.
When has Spielberg gone to the fall festivals, though?
True but an AFI premiere the very least would have made sense to me.
Based on his SAG nominations history, the guild loves him. If Cyrano picks up, he’s a sure fire nominee alongside Cumberbatch and Smith.
Maybe my comment was premature, MC of 73. Not sure that’s enough for anything.
We’ll see, it is still far from its final critical consensus.
Oh here’s the confirmed list of industry screening dates! Interesting point on release schedules as strategic decision. But my only concern especially with Nightmare Alley is its lack of festival appearance considering it’s Del Toro and Searchlight. Because strategy-wise a festival berth for a Del Toro film could add more “prestige” to it coming to the awards season. That’s why I was surprised it missed Venice.
Apparently it wasn’t finished by Venice and is still heavily in post-production now which seems odd to me because half the footage was in the can by March 2020 and the other half by December 2020 (covid break between the two) so I would have assumed they had plenty of time for post-production already.
Right? That is also why I’m a bit concerned that they may have rushed it over at post-prod. As mentioned by another commenter regarding the composer, having Nathan Johnson (with all due respect to his talent) replace Desplat who was Del Toro’s original choice may suggest so. I mean, Del Toro could have waited for Desplat’s score to realize his vision for it. But in Del Toro I trust.
I agree, Del Toro films are always cinematic experiences even when they are not quite the home runs so I am looking forward to this one, as well. I just can’t shake this hunch that as far as critical reception goes, it will be more Crimson Peak than The Shape of Water.
Well, It’ll be fine if that would be the case because I prefer Crimson Peak over The Shape of Water and I LOVE the latter! Awards season speaking, I always believe that Crimson Peak was robbed BIG TIME for a Production and Costume designs, Cinematography, Music, Cinematography and Makeup, Supporting Actress (my favorite Chastain performance) and Directing nods because of maligned studio campaigning and marketing! In fact, I’ll go as far as consider it one of the best Production Design work I’ve seen in film. I mean that manor is a character that reveals more layers in the story on repeat viewings.
Just a few weeks ago I showed Crimson Peak to friends of mine who have never seen it and they were all in awe of Chastain, the production design, costumes, cinematography and the original score, as well. The film is definitely a criminally underrated genre classic that would have deserved proper Oscar consideration.
Only Stewart and Cruz seem safe right now. McDormand, Gaga and Colman all look good but not quite “there” yet.
If their movies are backed by critics and box-office, Kidman and Mara could stole Hudson’s and Chastain’s buzz (Is there any buzz for Hudson and her movie?).
Comer looks to be lost cause. Box-office bomb in a crowded category like never before? And movie isn’t even that beloved by critics. Unlikely.
There are going to be surprises.
I really don’t understand the holdout for Hudson. It feels like people have both forgotten that movie and also didn’t think it was very good at all.
It’s going VOD and I think Amazon is going to be pushing it. Plus, she’s making a lot of TV appearances.
What about Cate Blanchett or the Belfast leading actress?
They’ve been confirmed as supporting, I believe.
Yes, both have been confirmed to be running in supporting.
Of course the Academy can still do whatever they want but the studios are definitely running supporting campaigns for both.
Didn’t know that, but I remembered that Halle Berry’s about to release a film she’d even directed and it’s supposed she’ll be campaigning for a nod…
I’ve now seen Spencer, I am more than okay with Kristen Stewart winning. Unless someone better comes along. I really hope McDormand takes the year off from nominations.
I don’t understand this regurgitation of Diana, over and over. Documentaries, TV shows, streaming shows, movies. She’s not a fascinating character, except to the English I guess. I just don’t think Americans care about Diana. So I figure, follow the money. Her story is being told over and over, somebody (besides the studio) is profiting.
I guess that’s why it’s so great that Larraín’s take is so entirely fresh!
Well for me, Diana is not a subject I gravitate to. But — because it’s a BRITISH subject I’m sure Kristen will win a boat load of British awards.
Best Actress is basically a sh*tshow right now, isn’t it? Except for Stewart (raves for her, film getting great reviews), everyone else seems to have strikes against them.
-Chastain – raves, but film disappointed.
-Hudson – good ink for her, early release date, movie so-so.
-Comer – raves, box office disaster.
-Colman – raves, but is the film big enough or accessible enough?
-Cruz – raves, but will AMPAS bite for a good Almodovar this year?
-McDormand – very good ink (not as good as Denzel), but she straddles Lead/Supporting, yes?
-Lady Gaga – mostly raves (some say she disappoints), critics may not love the film.
-Tessa Thompson – great ink for her, small film, Negga getting better ink in Supporting.
-Jones (CODA) – really good ink, feel-good film. Newcomer nod?
-Haim – very good ink, great reviews for the film. Newcomer nod, like Jones?
Then you got complete unknown factors (but BIG hitters) in:
-Kidman, Berry, Bullock, Mara, Blanchett, Lawrence, also Zegler. Any of these actresses could strike at the right moment – voting-wise.
Try making an educated guess of the 5 from all of that! Very, very difficult. And I feel like the different voting bodies this year will be all over the place, too.
Strenght of the each movie overall (MC and box-office performance) will be probably deciding factor in the end.
I actually think Sasha’s list of predictions is pretty good here.
I feel like Stewart is a clear frontrunner for now (even though I’m not entirely convinced that she’s going to win yet), but Hudson is a good GG/SAG type pick. I think she will also show up at BFCA which will seal her nomination. McDormand will get in on the strength of her performance and the BP/BD nomination of Macbeth (which I think will happen), Cruz could get a strong critics’ push and Parallel Mothers might indeed end up a BP nominee, and the last spot will go to one of those currently considered on the fringes – either in films with lukewarm critical receptions, or films too weird to get in across the board.
I’m in the Cruz camp as well, but I wouldn’t be shocked at all if Colman or McDormand pulled the upset.
Going against the grain, because that’s what I do:
1. Cruz
2. Kidman
3. Gaga
4. Mcdormand
5. Coleman
6. Stewart
7. Chastain
8. Hudson
9. Comer
10. Berry
Weird hunch but my guess is that if House of Gucci is just moderately successful (55+ MC, 15M+ opening weekend), then Lady Gaga will probably make the cut.
But those are big ifs. The very late review embargo (22nd, release date is 24th) is suspicious and this is a prestige pic so critical consensus could actually have an impact on the BO, too.
We’ll see in two weeks what’s up.
For now I firmly believe Kristen Stewart is still the only near-lock, the Cruz-Colman-Chastain-Hudson quartet looks solid for now, so does Frances McDormand if she does indeed stays in the lead race, and my guess would be that the from the already seen group, Jodie Comer, Tessa Thompson and Alana Haim have the most potential to surprise.
And of course all this could mean nothing in the end if the high-profile late entries ALL pop : Nicole Kidman, Halle Berry, Rachel Zegler, Jennifer Lawrence, Sandra Bullock, Rooney Mara, Naomie Harris.
P.S. I could also see a LaKeith Stanfield / Maggie Gyllenhaal kind of category placement surprise on Nominations Morning with Jodie Comer popping up in the supporting category instead of lead. We’ll see. She is such a great talent that at this point I just want to see her get a nod in either category.
I don’t see the race without Chastain in the Top 5, to be honest. I know the film disappointed, but she received flat-out raves and the film is being brought around again right around now. She is campaigning her butt off, as well — not that that always translates to success.
I would love to see Chastain nominated, I root for her every season but I am hesitant a bit to predict her this time because I am not sure the early release date + critical / BO disappointment combo will be possible to overcome.
Oh man, I know… But thinking of her performance (and God, that was a performance worthy of a win already) and the number of Oscar-worthy work she’s put out there in the last decade almost to be snubbed even of a nomination makes the possibility of her being robbed of a nomination one more time just egregious. She has at the very least to be nominated this time around, I don’t care about the competition, she’s that worthy finally landing that third nomination.
Yeah, it’s a big stumbling block (critics, box office). On performance alone, she should be in with a bullet. But true, we know how this game is played every year.
I’ll honestly be very disappointed if she’s snubbed even of a nomination AGAIN. Like come on. She should have earned that third nomination with so many astonishing performances (from A Most Violent Year to Miss Sloane and Molly’s Game) it’s almost ridiculous and regardless of how one feels about The Eyes Of Tammy Faye (which I personally liked well enough btw) she’s just EXTRAORDINARY in the film.
She transforms completely and daringly in an extremely particular figure, she sings, she cries, she shouts and she portrays an unexpected real life figure. She ticks so many boxes and she just knocks it out of the park. If it was up to me I’d hand her both the Oscar for her terrific work here but also the Emmy for Best Actress In A Limited Series for Scenes Of A Marriage already. She had once again one hell of a year. It’s nuts a talent like her is yet to win the Oscar let alone hasn’t been nominated in essentially a decade.
Agree with you on Comer, I have had her in supporting all along.
Just throwing this out there, but has McDormand crossed the Streep threshold in that ANY well received performance is likely to land a nomination. Not saying “win” this year, mind you.
Watch out for her in Sarah Polley’s “Women Talking” next year if we’re talking Oscar number five.
I think she is definitely Meryl-territory now if not even above. She does have one more Oscar in lead and one more in total.
This is laughable. Yes, she has an Oscar for producing and won a third in lead in a crazy year but she’s definitely not in Streep or above-Streep territory. Streep is beloved like no other contemporary actress. (She was beloved as THE actress even when numerous actresses had one more Oscar in lead than her, which was the case before 2012.) McDormand simply isn’t considered to be the legend Streep is. And she’s certainly not as beloved by her peer group. And if it comes to actors, who vote for nominations, I would say the top 3 in terms of how beloved they are right now are:
1. Streep
2. Davis
3. Blanchett.
No McDormand.
This is laughable. Yes, she has an Oscar for producing and won a third in lead in a crazy year but she’s definitely not in Streep or above-Streep territory. Streep is beloved like no other contemporary actress. (She was beloved as THE actress even when numerous actresses had one more Oscar in lead than her, which was the case before 2012.) McDormand simply isn’t considered to be the legend Streep is. And she’s certainly not as beloved by her peer group. And if it comes to actors, who vote for nominations, I would say the top 3 in terms of how beloved they are right now are:
1. Streep
2. Davis
3. Blanchett.
No McDormand.
I’m sure she’s very g00d in Macbeth but that is a supp0rting r0le ! Macbeth has 719 lines in the play . Lady Macbeth has 265 lines . It’s n0t a lead r0le pe0ple !
Seen Stewart, Gaga, Cruz, Hudson, and Colman, and the winner by a country ass mile is….
https://uploads.disquscdn.com/images/362b36ca77d307b944c6fa0438f56428428af51b827e6a21e701b8bdc3ff7ed1.gif
It’s Marion Cotillard great.
Completely agree. I’ve only seen Stewart and Hudson but Chastain would definitely have my vote (so far). I’ve also seen Comer and she was excellent and deserving of a nomination.
Couldn’t agree more for both Jessica and Jodie Comer. Both delivered performances that rank among my favorite performances of the year period, male or female.
So good to see so many people online saying how Jessica gave the leading female performance of the year regardless of how they might feel about the film. I’ve seen so many of the potential competition already (Colman, Cruz, Thompson, Hudson, Comer, Reinsve) and with the exception of Colman none comes close. I wish I could hand Jessica the Oscar already. She’s a chameleon and then some. Crazy to think the person behind thosr insane prosthetics portraying Tammy Faye with such humanity, complexity and compassion is the same playing someone like Mira in Scenes Of A Marriage. She’s a chameleon and then some and she had one hell of a year.
Speaking 0f Mari0n C0tillard she sh0uld have w0n her sec0nd Academy Award f0r her transcendent vperf0rmance in James Gray’s masterpiece The Immigrant but Harvey Weinstein destr0yed that film’s 0scar chances because Gray w0uld n0t bend the knee and kiss the ring 0f P0pe Harvey the First !
Well for sure none of the best actresses will be Ruth Negga or Tessa Thompson.
Just saw Passing today. Tessa Thompson is wonderful in a very subtle, nuanced Lead role. Negga pops a little more, but I’d say she is Supporting. Both women are great and “deserving” of nominations in their respective categories. I think time will tell, and critics mentions, if they have true Oscar buzz.
I think they’ll be squeezed out of actress unless it’s “supporting”. The movie did nothing for me. I guess I was expecting a Queen (TV Mini Series)” movie, which was a mini-movie on TV 1993 with Halle Berry. And MUCH more interesting. And I had a hard time following the first minutes of the movie when Tessa goes to the restaurant and sits down hiding her face. Was she not supposed to be in the cafe because of her skin color or her “class”? Because she could NOT have passed for white. No way. And it took me a while to believe that Ruth Negga was light skinned enough to be passing. And I was distracted by the poor wigs. I’m sorry, but whoever made those wigs need to quit the business. They tried to build the tension with the friendship between the husband and Clare and it almost worked. Andre Holland was spectacular by the way. I couldn’t determine the time period? 1920? 1930?
A movie has to flow for me without me having to suspend disbelief. And I kept questioning this and that. And I didn’t believe the first few minutes when Irene tried to pass as white because her skin was too dark.
As I mentioned, the movie was meh for me. I saw the ending coming.
I liked the performances. Tessa was lovely and worked for me. But there is something about this film that struck me as amateurish.
Other than that, it’s the 1920s, I guess. The parties were very much 1920s. The 1930s were plagued by the Depression. Plus you have the clothes that scream 1920s. And when Holland’s and Negga’s characters meet, he’s bragging about saving patients and she mentioned something about having gone through this as well. I believe they were talking about the 1918 pandemic.
I agree. My review is here: https://moviestruck.substack.com/.
Saw it today as well and while both are phenomenal and totally deserving of Oscar attention the subtle as you say nature of their work and the piece in general combined with the arthouse, deeply indie style of the film doesn’t make me confident in predicting either of them. Loved the film but yeah, time will tell indeed.