I fear she'll use the red carpet as her landing strip and slice me to bits with her propellor. On purpose!
While I think the Amelia trailer is trying a little too desperately to make this seem action-packed -- the music and the sound mix in particular are screaming "it's not just a stuffy period biopic. We swear!" -- it looks right up Oscar's alley all told:- Inspirational. Check!
- True story. Check!
- Tragic ending. Check!
- Iconic Historical Figure Everyone Is Duty Bound To Love. Check!
I like the timbre of Swank's voice in the trailer. I must admit. I've clearly underestimated her in my Best Actress predictions (my excuse: previously she'd been less than convincing in period pieces) for she manages just fine for these 113 seconds. Oscar prediction updates coming on Sunday.
Earlier this year when I was watching Night at the Museum ... Resurrection, Salvation, 2 (?) ... I was giggling to myself about how Amy Adams was practically starting Hilary Swank's Oscar campaign for her. Like "See how important and strong this woman was, Americans who always fail history tests ?!? Now that I've reminded you who she is, won't it be awesome to see her biopic this fall?!?"
The happiest moment of the trailer for me was seeing EWAN MCGREGOR again.
I'm always pleased to watch him. But I'm sad that his only "prestige" films these days seem to be biopics which pair him with my least favorite actresses in thankless roles wherein he helps their character achieve greatness (see also: Miss Potter). I'm even sadder that now he's asked to do this without so much as a title card in the trailer. Sigh. He needs another Moulin Rouge! sized hit quickly.
*
Posts
62 comments:
Ha! Nothing screams "this film was made for awardage" more than placing the words "Golden Globe Winner" in front of its players.
I'm sorry to say this, but Swank looks and sounds incredibly perfrect for this icon. It's like DAMN!!! She did it again.
Now I know I HATED the fact that she freakin won for Million Dollar Baby. I loved her dress that night, but my god it should have gone to Fucking Kate Winslet or freakin Anette Benning and it did not because of Clint Eastwood. Why dear god did she win for that when THIS should be her second? I mean, I don't know who will stand in her way. Probably Emily Watson, or if they put Monique in the lead race. I might see that, or the one actress who plays her daughter.
But anyway, I too am THRILLED to see Ewan. He's incredibly underrated, and I just miss seeing him. I mean I know he was in Angels and Demons, but who saw that shit????
I don't know. I hate to say it, but its not like I think she needs three freakin Oscars, but this one looks too perfect. I don't know. I don't think it might happen, but you never know.
Tory Smith
if hilary swank wins three oscars before meryl streep i'm going to leap from my balcony -- a suicide for le cinema!
I enjoyed this moment, in particular:
http://i289.photobucket.com/albums/ll216/PunkGlamour777/Picture1-1.png
;)
I know it would be a travesty, but I'm still kind of hoping that Swank does win her third best actress Oscar this year, just because it would be such a hilarious WTF scenario. No real reason other than that.
Nooo! She doesn't look *that* good. Seriously, there's no way she's going 3/3, and I hope she doesn't even go 2/3. I don't even care how biased I'm being. There are a ton of performances that look great his year, not just Swanks.
And to me, the trailer screams, "OSCAR... ME, I WANT ONE!" Ugh.
she is this years angie j nommed at all the right awrds sag,gg,bafta and oscar but is regarded simply as filler although the "i will" line really got me.
She's apparently perfected the Oscar formula for her:
Playing women who do "masculine" things and have tragic deaths.
Is that the Sunshine score? Lord, if Amelia ends the same way that did, count me IN.
Oh c'mon Nate... at least Meryl has 2 Oscars...
The really horrible picture is Swank winning 3 before Michelle Pfeiffer, Glenn Close, Sigourney Weaver, Julianne Moore, Annette Bening and Kathleen Turner even win 1!
I agree. It's time Ewan McGregor got a role in a film in which he is the center of the attention and not supporting a stronger female lead.
I seriously doubt Swank will get a third Oscar, though. The Academy doesn't give those extra Oscars easily, and not when Meryl hasn't gotten her third yet.
Unless the field is weak this year, I think the Academy will want to award someone else.
ugh, Nat, could you have saved this for Monday?
I remain indignant. This film will taxi down the runway and belly-flop into the ocean.
Miss Swank looks great in this.
Rather off-topic, but have you seen Away We Go yet? I'm anxious to hear your thoughts.
I would like to see her win her third Oscar just to see(read) the reactions. That would keep me entertained for at least a week.
Oh, and lets make one thing clear. It was Imelda's Oscar (not Kate's and certainly not Benning's).
YES, that definatly should have been imelda Staunton's oscar. She is gonna be in another mike Leigh film so maybe she'll get another chance. F*** the academy for that one, million dollar baby was mediocre.
I wish too that Ewan McGregor had another hit like Moulin Rouge!
And I really hope that Swank doesn't take her third statute home! C'mon, it's not fair that's she would have 3 Oscars while people like Glenn Cloose have none!
But I've to admit she looks good in this
The field seems to undercrowded this year... I could definitely see Swank going 3 for 3...
If this is any good she'll be the frontrunner. Or do you think Sidibe will stand a chance against a 2-time Oscar winner in a biopic about a world-class legend that is loved by all + she's a pioneer + she's had a tough life?
If the nominees turn out to be newcomer Abbie Cornish (in a Campion film... even Cannes didn't scream LOVE LOVE LOVE and) or newcomer Gabi Sidibe...
Only competition for Swank IF the film and her are good: Pfeiffer (but she's never won, and the Academy has snubbed her before, and Chéri is not a very good film), Mirren (I don't know she'll even be nominated... A Taymor film with no distribution, a brothel story...) or Renée Zellweger...
With this in mind, if she can hold the buzz 'til the premiere and if she does perform well, I cannot see HOW ON EARTH she won't be nominated... and maybe win.
Which would suck BIG TIME. But it's life.
Think of it: can you live with the thought that Hilary Swank will equal Katherine Hepburn's 4 Leading Lady Oscars? ('cos if she wins this year, it seems reasonable - and she doesn't have the backlash that Hepburn had to endure because she appears in the red carpet and goes to award cerimonies)
However, in some ways, I find them similar ...
But I also find it outraging that Meryl only has 2 (and one supporting), and Julianne, Sigourney, Kathleen, Michelle, etc., don't even have one...
I was under the impression that Cannes did scream LOVE, LOVE, LOVE for Cornish's performance. And I'd say there is really good competition this year: Mulligan, Sidibe, Pfeiffer, Watson, Mirren, Zellweger, Tautou, Garai, Ronan, Portman, Connelly, Cruz, and Weisz.
There are two reviews from test screenings of Amelia, and both are rather negative: http://www.aintitcool.com/node/40025
Ironically, this trailer made me depressed that MacGregor isn't in better films.
Jose said it best. This is Swank's genre, and God help me if she wins another Oscar for it. I will scream bloody murder.
Just realized I forgot about the Ewan/Hugh Jackman pairing in that film that flopped. I don't care if its crap, I need to see a new Ewan film. Must go rent.
Did they even name-check McGregor? I don't remember seeing it. I guess he is only a Golden Globe nominee so that doesn't look quite as impressive as 2 time Oscar winner. :/
The trailer looked... meh. I like the font!
I did always figure that, like mrripley said, she'd take token spots at all the major awards and then just get a default nomination at Oscar. But I'd love to be proven wrong (unless she's excellent, I suppose...)
I was talking about the overall film (not Cornish - because very often (ex: Sally Hawkins) if they don't like the film they don't go for the performance... And Abbie Cornish has not had what we'd call a steady, growing career)
I forgot about Mulligan (but she's still a newcomer with a lot to prove) like Sidibe and Cornish.
About Saoirse Ronan... I had her in my predictions but curiously Nathaniel put her in supporting so I don't know what to think (although in the book she's the lead, i think Nat's right, the movie adaptation will not be viewed entirely by her eyes... so I don't know if she'll get more screen time than Weisz)
And I also forgot that Weisz can use both films (Agora and The Lovely Bones) to campaign... Hmm.
It's been so long since Pfeiffer is up for Oscar attention (but I think she'll be in - a win, not so sure... after the snubs and the losses...)
Penélope Cruz was nom'ned in 2006, won in 2008... Isn't another nom in 2009 a bit too much? (although I predicted her; I kinda am having second thoughts)
I don't like Connelly a lot (I didn't think that her performance in A Beautiful Mind was that good) but Creation may change my mind.
Garai I don't know. She was miscast in Atonement. Not a very good performance. Let's see the movie...
I like Portman but the movie has been delayed, bla bla bla...
What I meant by undercrowded is... no one has buzz (except for Mulligan; in Precious it's Mo'Nique who's grabbing the attentions)
You didn't mention Okonedo. Skin gathered a lot of buzz for her last year but the buzz was gone when the movie was delayed...
Now Watson, Mirren and Zellweger I think are good bets. If this is a weak acting year, maybe Tautou could make it to a win?
But I agree with most of you...
Although it is in Swank's genre (girl doing manly stuff) I don't buy the trailer.
Like Nat said, it screams «it's more action-packed than you'd think, it's not a period biopic» and it is OBVIOUSLY an Oscar clip (like Jolie's «I want MY son back!») - the «2-time Academy Award Winner Hilary Swank» and the «GG nominee Richard Gere» made me think of Doubt...
I was just pointing out that all bets are off. And most of the other actresses have "problems" (she has them too, of course; she already has 2 Oscars AND the film is by Mira Nair)
(just a curiosity: Hilary won in 1999 and in 2004 (5 years between them); won't it be fun if she wins 5 years later - 2009?)
Come on, she look great here. Stop bitching. I want her to be nominated again. Not a win, of course. But, I don't know, I don't like the idea os Meryl Streep winning a third Oscar for "A Nancy Meyers movie", or worse "A Nora Ephron movie". They are two of the worst working directors in Hollywood. They only don't get the same Michael Bay backlash because their movies aim at grownups. But they are still awful.
i want meryl to win for a comedy so badly (as opposed to another drama win) so i'm hoping the untitled project is surprisingly good... or at least meryl is surprisingly awesome in it.
i don't think hilary could win a third... at least not until she's old.
i mean meryl had plenty of chances to win 3 and they hold out. 2 is a lot for any one person to have.
I really don't think Hilary could win another one, but she may get a nomination.
I seriously don't think Sidibe will get in all the buzz seems to be for Monique.
I like Mulligan, Cornish and Ronan but I don't think all of them will get in. Probably two and I think Mulligan will be one of them. She also has the Greatest and bit parts in the Brothers and Public Enemies.
Unless the category is really weak this year, unfortunately I don't see a nomination for Michelle. Although I am seeing the film on Monday.
Unless the films totally suck then I think Mirren is in.
At this point I would predict
Swank
Mirren
Cornish
Streep
Mulligan
I also think people are underestimating Susan Sarandon in The Lovely Bones for supporting actress.
I always thought The Lovely Bones would get at least two Oscar nominations (supporting actor and actress - Tucci and Sarandon/Ronan (if Ronan goes lead, I think that Sarandon has a good shot - that gradma is HILARIOUS and perfect for Sarandon - comedic wit with dramatic depth!)
Nat, I don't know if Streep will get nominated for the Nancy Meyers comedy (or Nora Epphron's if she goes lead).
If she goes supporting for Julie&Julia, she might even lose to Mo'Nique, for god's sake!
Meh. I don't know about Swank. I think you're underestimating her. When we think she is far away, there she comes with a super-hyper-mega baity Oscary role and sweeps the Academy (not us) off our feets... If she could win for M$B... And if the year is bad... I'm not seeing Mulligan or Cornish or Sidibe or Garai or Portman taking the prize... And Mirren's win is too recent... And Pfeiffer has past her 'overdue' time... Emily Watson has FINALLY a great chance to win, the way I see it, if the movie is good...
My prediction now stands...
- Hilary Swank
- Abbie Cornish (Saoirse Ronan if lead)
- Carey Mulligan
- Michelle Pfeiffer
- Emily Watson
I would rather have seen Ewan McGregor play Amelia.
Jorge... why can't you see Mulligan winning? The ACADEMY has a long history of awarding the new girl with the top prize.
I hope a unknown movie comes around and completely surprises us with greatness because it seems all the great upcoming movies are already known and that's kinda boring. I feel everything is predicted or close to what will be correct.God, I hope good surprises come.
I don't think of Hilary Swank when I think of my favorite actresses, and in between her award-winning movies, I forget about her. When I (accidentally) see something like PS I Love You, I am unmoved.
YET- in her award-winning movies, I am totally caught up, I believe totally in her character and think she has given some of the most indelible portraits of women ever. I don't know what category Amelia will fall into, but I've always loved the character of Amelia Earhart ever since I was little, so odds are good I'll find this one special.
Hmm... I don't know why Nat. For multiple reasons. And for the belief that in a fair world Watson or Pfeiffer will win the Oscar this year. Swank's going home empty-handed and so is happy-to-be-nominated Carey Mulligan (like Hathaway last year).
:)
personally I think its a good thing. I didn't like the honorary award, what was the point? Giving someone an award for what they used to be, good job now that your old we can honor you. Shouldnt they have been honored around there own time back then. As a teenager interested in movies trying to get involved with the oscars I don't want to see a montage of people I don't know that are probably dead. I have no connection. Its not like the night was fun already so its okay to add a couple boring filled minutes in it. My mother doesn't even usually know them. Its unnecessary to me. They had their time so why celebrate again? I might be alone on this but that's how I see it.
I'm disappointed that the film looks so cheesy, and the performance doesn't grab me.
I'm sure the typecasting angle will keep her out as much as anything. Just ask Mickey Rourke.
Hilary Swank's appeal boggles my mind. Two Oscars for her, pfftt! I really want Ewan in something good, but I hope this film bombs. In my mind Hilary Swank has one Oscar nomination, and she's dead too. Sorry.
Get yo' third Oscar nod, Hilary! I ain't mad at ya. I've always had her in my five predictions for lead actress. The role's too much bait for it not to be a real contender. Even if the film disappoints, I still think that Swank will get in, and that trailer pretty much nailed it.
If Richard Gere plays his cards right, he might nab a first nod too, but I'd guess in supporting instead of lead.
This might be Mira Nair's big shot at the dance too. That's kind of exciting. But I heard before that the film's lacking. I hope it's good regardless.
I think it´s a little bit to much
Streep should win for a comedy. What about a Woody Allen comedy? A Wes Anderson comedy? A David O.Russell comedy? But she doesn't work with these people, you know.
She did it again and she'll be nominated again!
Well, you always put this topic on, let's admit Hilary has 2 Oscars but there are people who have one Oscar and that's embarrasing, people like Renée Zellweger, Gwyneth Paltrow, Helen Hunt, Jennifer Hudson, xtc.
And there are people like Michelle Pfeiffer, Glenn Close, Angela Lansbury, xtc who HAVEN'T WON YET or people like mia farrow and jennifer jason leigh that HAVEN'T BEEN NOMINATED YET.
gabrieloak if i know Ewan McGregor i bet he'd rather have played Amelia Earhart too.
I think Hilary Swank is a really good actress. I really liked "Million Dollar Baby", and thought she deserved her Oscar for "Boys Don't Cry", but if she gets her 3rd Oscar before Meryl I don't know what I'll do. On one hand if she did get her 3rd Oscar it would be cool because she's been nominated 3 times and won all 3 times, but come on you give Hilary Swank her 3rd Oscar and not Meryl Fucking Streep, WTF?
I wonder if Annette Bening spits up a little bit in her mouth when she hears the name, Hilary Swank.
Lord knows that I do.
I dont think i'll ever be sold on this film until i actually see it. It just doesnt interest me and both screening reviews i've read basically say "Don't waste your money on this" so idk.
And as far as Ronan being lead or supporting. In the screenplay, she definately "comes off" as the clear lead. I really didnt count lines or anything but i think she has the most ACTUAL screentime ALONG with a voiceover throughout the entire film so. But i think everyone will have a good chunk since the running time i guess is 2 hours and 20 minutes.
I hate to say this, but haven't we already seen UP this summer?
She'll get the nom. She sounds really good, but she won't steal Streep's thunder.
Streep's Julia Child will be the impersonation of the year. From the trailer and the clips, Streep looks really good, and early reviews are positive, unless the one for "Amelia" that appeared on AICN.
I doubt "Amelia" will be a hit with moviegoers, but the comparison between Jolie and Swank is right : good performance by a former winner in a prestige drama tailor-made for Oscar = oscar nom
First I really hope Meryl Streep will win for a Comedy film this year (Doesn't matter which film). Her comedic timick is very underrated...
I still don't understand why all norah Ephron backlash? I know, she made awful films but also created good screenplays ("Silkwook", "Heartburn" and "When Harry met Sally..."), and the first two films were starred by La Streep.
About Swank, the trailer looks too "Australia". I think the film bombs and even if Swank will get that nomination, there's no way that she'll win a thrid Oscar. Her backlash is big and she hasn't the overdue factor.
1. Newcomers: I think people are understimate Cornish and Mulligan's chances. AMPAS loves young starlets and both roles are too Oscarable. Cornish plays a woman semibiopic with a known director (After Holly Hunter and Anna Paquin wins and Barbara Hershey nom) and Mulligan plays an Audrey Hepburnish role. And abound the careers, that wasn't the case for Swank in 1999 and Marlee Matlin
2. Possible a longshot but maybe Helen Mirren is stronger than expected. She's very respected and even for her age she has lead roles.
3. If the film gets distributor in USA, Emily Watson would be the frontrunner of the season.
4. When is the real release of "Mother and Child"? Bening vs. Swank 3 round??!!
I don't want meryl Streep to win this year. I dont think hilary will be nominated and probably doesn't deserve to be. But I think meryl Streep's performance will be good but oscar worthy? Just because shes meryl Streep doesn't mean she deserves it no matter how good the other nominees were, that's the vibe I'm getting from other peoples comments. I hope cornish, mulligan, or sidibe will be great in there movies and one of them win if there, hopefully, deserving. Who cares about the overdue factor once its done its done. Give the oscar to who deserves it not to someone who deserved it years ago. If meryl is good enough then yes give it to her if not don't give it to her just because she should have more than she has.
I wasn't into that "Julie & Julia" trailer at all, and if it wasn't Meryl Streep in contention, I doubt that performance would be talked about as a sure-fire Oscar nomination. It seems so lightweight to me. I guess that Meryl is as overdue as someone can be who already has two Oscars, but I want her to win for something great. If it has to be for a comedy, then it should be for something more than a Nora Ephron triffle that she's sort of the lead in but not really. I want to see her win for something like "August: Osage County." I think that anyone who nails that one is going to be a force in their year. But maybe "J&J" will be great. I want it to be for Meryl and Amy's sakes.
But this post was supposed to be about Hilary Swank and "Amelia"! I think the trailer's great, and I'm hoping for the best with it. It's kind of a shame that Swank has to carry the weight of two Oscars on her back when she had nothing to do with the voting to receive those awards. She is forgettable when she plays ordinary and feminine in either romantic comedies or thrillers. But "Boys Don't Cry" is still one of the all-time great lead actress wins, and even though my heart was always with Imelda Staunton, I can totally see why people latched on to Maggie and propelled Swank to her second win for "M$B". If she wins a third for "Amelia", that might be the most wicked event ever, just for the fluke-ness of it all and the uproar that it will most definitely cause. It's so everything that the Academy has loved for so long it seems. If she's worth it, then by all means, award it to her, but yikes, three lead acting wins in 10 years! Crazy stuff.
Nathaniel may be saved from his "le suicide" by the mere fact that Best Supporting Actress is awarded prior to Best Actress on Oscar night.
I still think that Helen Mirren will get a nom. She has two films coming out - and the role in Love Ranch should be pretty meaty.
But judging only from what I've seen so far this year Mulligan and Pfeiffer are in. If Swank wins again I'm done with the Oscars for good. Nobody is that good, especially her.
Nooo! She doesn't look *that* good. Seriously, there's no way she's going 3/3, and I hope she doesn't even go 2/3. I don't even care how biased I'm being. There are a ton of performances that look great his year, not just Swanks.
And to me, the trailer screams, "OSCAR... ME, I WANT ONE!" Ugh.
I'm also very biased because I don't even want her to be nominated just because if she does manage a nomination there's always a chance that she could win since she's in her Oscar zone, or as Jose put it best, playing women who do masculine things that die tragically.
I don't want her anywhere near the nominations next year especially if for some reason Annette Bening got in too because it will be five years again between nominations, she's in her comfort zone, and at least right now the names that have popped up as possible contenders seem too new (Sidibe, Mulligan, Cornish, Ronan, Garai) or have already won too recently (Mirren, Cruz). So I hope that someone like Michelle Pfeiffer, Meryl Streep, Emily Watson, or some wildcard is able to benefit from the lack of competition right now.
I want my favorites who haven't won or won for awhile like Samantha Morton, Meryl Streep, Laura Linney, etc. to release some kind of leading role movie this year because of it being a weak year right now for leading actresses. Plus, I want them to get help with the 10 Best Picture thing since that might only be for this year only, so they might as well try to push out their movies this year instead of waiting. I just want to scream at the top of my lungs, "just do some kind of leading role to get nominated and keep Swank out, and you might possibly win too".
You can't possibly imagine how much I'm hoping that Rabbit Hole can actually be released this year, doubtful, so that Kidman will have an easy path to the winner's podium once again, and I don't even love her as much as Nathaniel does.
Don't blame Hilary Swank for knowing what her strengths are and doing them well. That's straight up bias. If she's one of the best five of the year, then she should be nominated. If the film is as strong as that trailer was, then I expect another nod. The other two Oscars don't have anything to do with her worthiness in this role. I know that the woman is hated to no end around here, and she's not nearly one of my favorite actresses, but enough's enough.
Hilary Swank deserved her first win. Hands down, it was a riveting and heartbreaking performance.
M$B? Yeah. Not at all.
And as much as I hate Oscar porn movies, I'm kind of excited with what Mira Nair does. Maybe if Amelia E. busts out in a Bollywood style song-and-dance I won't be so biased against it?
I agree with Timothy. I like that Swank has carved out a niche for herself. She usually is really good in a good film. You can't hold that against her. I am sorry Nat that you like Benning more (I don't) and she had to lose twice to Swank. But honestly, I will remember Swank's two Oscar winning characters to Benning's two.
Don't blame Hilary Swank for knowing what her strengths are and doing them well. That's straight up bias. If she's one of the best five of the year, then she should be nominated. If the film is as strong as that trailer was, then I expect another nod. The other two Oscars don't have anything to do with her worthiness in this role. I know that the woman is hated to no end around here, and she's not nearly one of my favorite actresses, but enough's enough.
I can't speak for everyone, but for me it's merely fun. I think she deserved her first one, but definitely not her second one. While I admire her for being able to play to her strengths, I don't don't know if she should be nominated just for doing well in her comfort zone as the case with M$B, and perhaps with Amelia. If she truly is one of the best five of the year sure, but I didn't think she was in 2004. Also, many other actresses who don't leave their comfort zone usually don't get recognized by Oscar, and sometimes even get blasted for staying in that comfort zone too long.
So I think it's unfair that just because her zone is seen as more acceptable to Oscar, she's has more awards than Meg Ryan, Julia Roberts, or Cameron Diaz. I'm not saying that they're great thespians either, but when they hit their zone, it works for a lot of people including me (at least most of the time I would say). I would also add that at least with those three they've tried stretching themselves as actresses for which I give them some credit, and while they all may not have been successful as they would have liked, when Swank isn't in her comfort zone, imho, I find her competent at best, ymmv.
Perhaps it's wrong of me to root against her even if she does give a great performance because she's not as versatile as other actresses who have won less oscars than her, but since the Oscars rarely award the right movie or person, I can be just as biased at times when I root for a movie or person or root against a movie or person. Now if I'm seriously wowed by her in Amelia, and truly feel that she's the best this year, I'll happily concede that I was wrong. Until then, I dread her even being nominated for this movie because biopic + her comfort zone + weak year for leading roles could equal win again no matter how impossible that seems now.
rahulb i have no problems with Swank's first win either as i've said many times. My "bias" against her has been greatly exaggerated because I like to have fun when I write. If you don't have fun with your obsessive nature, why be obsessed?
timothy "enough's enough" ...i thought i was being fair to Swank this time. I noted that I do like her voice in the trailer ;)
I would also add that at least with those three they've tried stretching themselves as actresses for which I give them some credit, and while they all may not have been successful as they would have liked, when Swank isn't in her comfort zone, imho, I find her competent at best, ymmv.
Swank has also tried to stretch herself as an actress. Whether it's worked for people or not is debatable, but the same thing can be said for Meg Ryan and a bunch of others. What I was getting at more than anything was that staying in your wheelhouse isn't a crime. Many actors have pulled that for decades and decades and are never called on it. After a point it becomes "delightful" even to see that sense of repetition in role after role. I don't think that Swank is at that point quite yet, but in the end this is a business, so I don't fault her for playing to her strengths. I'd never actively root against a performance from working, especially when there are people involved in the project that I want to see succeed (particularly Mira Nair). It's petty to root against someone just b/c of prior Oscar baggage that she had no control over (and it's not just here -- it's rampant on other awards sites too).
I accept another Swank nomination, but, a third Oscar? Her first Oscar was deserving, but her second (Not because she was per se bad, she's good; but her competition was a mile stronger) is unfair, especially for the other four performances. My preferences:
-Kate Winslet: Simple, her best performance right now.
-Imelda Staunton: Mesmerizing
-Catalina Sandino Moreno: Without histrionism or over the top scenes. She was powerful.
-Annette Bening: I saw her last week and I love more her performance... She's delightful.
I hope the new stars like Cornish and Mulligan stop Swank and one of them received a very deserving Oscar. Also, I can live with a consolation osar for La Streep (After all, Katherine Hepburn has two, also John Wayne and Lee Marvin).
But I still have hope, Swank was simple awful in period films ("The Black Dalhia", "The Affair of the Necklare"...)
Yea, i'd rather see the category loaded with young actresses like Saoirse Ronan, Carey Mulligan, Abbie Cornish, and Romola Garai rather than the Streep's and Swank's of the world.
Post a Comment