270. Political Animals

270. (11 Nov) Political Animals (2012, Greg Berlanti, Bethany Rooney, Michael Morris, David Petrarca & Tucker Gates) 63



This deliciously soapy miniseries (or canceled "limited series event") certainly deserved a second season. As it stands at six episodes, it seems half-finished. Powerhouse Sigourney Weaver surely had so much more planned for her character, but her work here is staggeringly human regardless of runtime. She's crafted a complex former First Lady and current Secretary of State that borrows nothing from inspiration Hillary Clinton, inviting no unfavorable comparisons and showing Weaver as competent a leading lady as ever.

Sebastian Stan and the dashing James Wolk are the other cast standouts, though Vanessa Redgrave makes quite an impression in a cameo. Ellen Burstyn chews the scenery nicely while Ciarán Hinds tries to do the same. Carla Gugino and Brittany Ishibashi are window dressing compared to everyone else.

Some storylines fall flat. A plot about a Chinese submarine sunk off the California coast is a bit lame and some of the relationship drama is unconvincing. But Stan portrays one of the more interesting gay characters on television in quite some time, even if he has a cliché drug problem. Scenes involving his suicide attempt are moving, as is his affair with a married Republican Congressman.

Ultimately, it's Weaver and Wolk who have the most interesting dynamic opposite one another. In a just world, they'd both pick up easy Emmys for their work. But at this point I'd settle for them to just get another series.

208. Playing for Time

208. (17 Sep) Playing for Time (1980, Daniel Mann) 73



This downright devastating look at concentration camp life hinges entirely on Vanessa Redgrave's powerhouse performance. I've always been stunned by her talent, but now more than ever I see her staggering ability to do so much with a line or a glance. The physicality makes this all the more believable as the ensemble have their heads shaved and appear gaunt, but more than anything it truly feels as if they're always staring death in the face. The few moments of levity they have are such a splendid reprieve from a barrage of consistently harrowing scenes. A limited color palette and Arthur Miller's poignant, anguished script make Playing for Time all the more powerful.

SONG FOR MARION

SONG FOR MARION
Written and Directed by Paul Andrew Williams
Starring Terence Stamp, Gemma Arterton and Vanessa Redgrave

Arthur: You know how I feel about enjoying things.

From the very moment SONG FOR MARION begins, you know exactly where it is going to end and every single stop it’s going to make along the way. Writer/Director, Paul Andrew Williams, constructs his script about one older man’s acceptance of his wife’s passing, with every cliche you can possibly imagine. Fortunately for him though, he has two brilliant, veteran actors, Terence Stamp and Vanessa Redgrave, doing their absolute best to transform his familiar scenario into something real. They may not be enough to make the film itself memorable but they do save it from being entirely forgettable.

Stamp plays Arthur, a crank of a man, who begrudgingly brings his cancer-ridden wife, Marion (Redgrave) to and from her glee club practices. He is the type of man who shuts himself off from the entire world, except for her. Only she knows who he is behind his stern exterior. Redgrave is exceptional. She clings to the little life she has left with every ounce of strength in her and at times, she sounds as if she will not make it to the end of her sentence. When she passes, Arthur must move on and Stamp carries Redgrave’s torch as gallantly as he can. He just isn’t given as much of substance to do with it.

Arthur never liked Marion’s glee club but in order for him to find the joy in his life without Marion, and in order to keep her memory alive as long as possible, he must find his singing voice. He also has a troubled relationship with his only son and helps the choir teacher (Gemma Arterton) with her love life when he isn’t busy grieving or practicing his lyrics. By the time Arthur actually gets to the part where he must sing a SONG FOR MARION, everything is in a very calculated place for a full emotional release. Seeing that moment coming a mile away though certainly takes away from its impact but Stamp himself, still moved me to tears.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1984

1984

So the much anticipated ranking is:

5. Sissy Spacek in The River

Sissy Spacek is just wasted in The River. Her character has no depth, very few juicy scenes and Sissy deserves so much more than this. It's not really her fault, it has more to do with the fact that the movie doesn't seem to care about her character and forces her into the background. While she shines in a few scenes, it's just not enough to make up for everything else (which is nothing). 

4. Sally Field in Places in the Heart

I can conclude that while Sally Field does nothing spectacular or really significant with her character, she still gives a proper and likeable performance as Edna in Places in the Heart. The screenplay and the movie is seriously working against her and she wasn't given enough opportunities to fight against it and maybe she didn't even have the strength as an actress in the first place. Still, her performance works just like Places in the Heart does: it relaxes you, entertains you. 

3. Jessica Lange in Country

It may not be her strongest work, but Jessica's able to play with my heartstrings even with a limited screenplay and cheesy lines, thanks to her emotional intelligence and enormous talent. She's able to make a scene unforgettable with only one look or a few tears. She's able to make a lasting impression without huge breakdowns and screaming and her dedication for the film is indeed admirable.

2. Vanessa Redgrave in The Bostonians

I can say that Vanessa is nothing short of fantastic  in The Bostonians. The screentime may not be on her side, she does a mighty fine job with her role, making her character a really inrtiguing and complex woman. Thanks to her beauty, radiant presence and fascinating personality, (just as Katharine Hepburn said) Vanessa is just a thrill to look at and listen to. An interesting, wonderful portrayal full of layers and mysteries.

     

1. Judy Davis in A Passage to India

Judy Davis gives a wonderful, unforgettable performance as Adela Quested. She staunchly keeps herself to her very own way and she never surrenders to the temptations of going the shorter, easier way just like the rest of the movie does. Although the movie doesn't give her much time or even credit (which is the reason why she doesn't leave you breathless like she does in Husbands and Wives), she's the one who leaves the strongest impression. 

 So I can proudly announce

that the winner is...

Judy Davis 

in 

A Passage to India

A very close one. :)

Final thoughts: Wow, it took ages to finish this year. I've already explained why, not going to do it once again. Anyway, this year was quite weak, but not as much as I expected. The winner was almost a coin toss,  though unfortunately it wasn't because of the embarassment of the riches. In the end, my winner was obvious #4 and #5 were easy. I don't want to waste much time on explaining why this year was that weak. I was just glad to see three movies that are quite hard to find and actually, this year was exciting as I had only seen Sally previously. :)

Omissions (I have one pick but I want to pick them all, they are so brilliant):

• Mia Farrow in Broadway Danny Rose
• Helena Ruzicková in Sun, Straw, Strawberry (undecided if she's supporting or leading)
• Maggie Smith in A Private Function
• Dorottya Udvaros - You bloody life! *MY PICK* 

The next year: 

• I"ll be going on with my two postponed years. :) One of them you remember, one of them you may not.

What do you think? Any thoughts on your mind?

Vanessa Redgrave in The Bostonians

Vanessa Redgrave received her fifth Oscar nomination for playing Olive Chancellor, a 19th-century suffragette in the Ivory-Merchant film, The Bostonians. I honestly don't know how much chance of winning Vanessa had. I suppose she was fifth in the end for several reasons. First, she was already an Oscar winnner who delivered a shocking speech when she won (they were probably afraid of giving her the Oscar once again). Second, her movie wasn't really successful in terms of nominations. I suppose in the end, she had to make do with some British and Jane Fonda's votes. I suppose at that time, she wasn't really concerned about her Oscar chances (since she had just lost her father, Michael Redgrave). 

First of all, let me just say that I dislike Ivory-Merchant movies quite and The Bostonians is a typical Ivory-Merchant movie. It's very fancy on the outside, but inside I don't see that much real content. However, I must say that I was impressed to a certain extent, especialy by the acting part. It was delightful to see some childhood (Christopher Reeve) and new favorites (Nancy Marchand, Linda Hunt) give wonderful, believable and impressive performances in their respective roles. I have to underline Nancy Marchand's work here, which may not be discussed at all, but is masterful, in my opinion. I think I would have rewarded her efforts with an Oscar nomination (I'm not kidding). But I don't want to rave about Marchand's wonderful work when I can rave about Vanessa Redgrave as well. :)

And now it's confession time: I've seen The Bostonians twice now and I was ready not only to condemn not only this particular performance of Redgrave but also (dedicated fans stop reading) Vanessa Redgrave as an actress (in a way, not completely) since now that NONE of her nominated leading performances impressed me as much as I expected based on the ravings of Redgrave's adoring fans. However, a second time (many should give a second chance to certain performances, now it was more of a co-incidence, though) made it all too clear why so many people idolize Vanessa (including the best of the best, Jane who always has to be right). Now I get not only this particular performance of Vanessa but also her as an actress and how she works as an actress and works miracles.

From a sexist point of view, it would be so easy to condemn Olive Chancellor's character as a man-hating, crazy lesbian who just wants to bang her little girl after executing all the men in the world. Crazily enough, this view can even be justified by some of Vanessa's choices in her performance: she doesn't show Olive as a perfect, gentle human being, instead she draws a much more complex and intriguing portrait of a woman who has very strong principles. Moreover, she was not even afraid of making her character an unlikeable, overdramatic, theatrical woman at certain points.

I would say that Olive is quite a bit like Barbara in Notes on a Scandal. She's in love with another woman but more in a platonic, poetic way. I'd say that sexuality is only a minimal part of her affection, it's more that she wants to have a noble, beautiful relationship with tenderness and intelligent conversations. However, neither Olive nor Barbara is afraid of blackmailing their true love. I was crazily impressed by the way Vanessa was portraying Olive's fake, theatrical  breakdowns whenever her darling Verena was meeting a man and therefore "cheating" on her. I always felt that Vanessa suggested that Olive was totally aware of her actions and the possible consequences on Verena.

Vanessa is simply a thrill to look at in the scenes between her character and Verena. The range of emotions that she's able to portray there is just fantastic: we can see her in love, being desperate, happy, devastated, deceited and lonely. Her face at the first meeing is just unforgettable: her teary eyes, her lips make you wonder how Vanessa can be so masterful and natural at the same time (I guess that's what we call talent). The same could be said about her previously mentioned breakdowns: it all becomes so haunting even despite the fact that Olive acts way too possessively with Verena. We can never find out if she wants to save Verena because of her own selfishness or the fact that she can really see the potential in that girl. It's unbelievable for me how wonderfully mysterious and haunting Olive's character becomes in the interpretation of Vanessa. For most of the time, it seems as if Olive was a spirit because that's what Vanessa does best: becoming one soul and body with her character (with the soul being the more significant one). This could have turned into crazy overacting (as some people consider this performance) but Vanessa wonderfully toned herself down whenever it was needed. Again, it's just amazing that she can be so natural and calculated at the same time (or not even calculated).

Olive's interactions with Christopher Reeve's character could have become scenes with bitchy one-liners and petty fights and instead they all turn out to be very realistic and unspectacular, just like how they would happen in real life. They become great opponents for each other and it's like looking at two worlds and belief systems battling on the screen. Every time Vanessa literally turns her back to Reeve, she seems so noble and superior (at least to me).

I also loved how Vanessa made all of Olives lines sound so solemn as if she was constantly putting on acts and delivering rousing speeches. Olive keeps saying that Verena is the one with the grace and the elegance and she's awkward and dull. One of the greatest achievements I can imagine from Vanessa is looking awkard and dull. It's interesting hwo Vanessa showed the "dull" side of Olive: we get to discover that she's a fascinating personality in private but in public she's rather artificial. Just look at her final speech: we can see that Olive is full of passion and fire and she 100% stands for what she believes in.

Overall, I can say that Vanessa is nothing short of fantastic  in The Bostonians. The screentime may not be on her side, she does a mighty fine job with her role, making her character a really inrtiguing and complex woman. Thanks to her beauty, radiant presence and fascinating personality, (just as Katharine Hepburn said) Vanessa is just a thrill to look at and listen to. An interesting, wonderful portrayal full of layers and mysteries.     For some, this could be the perfect example of overacting but for me, this performance was a real thrill.

What do you think? 

The Next Year

1984

So the nominees were:

• Judy Davis in A Passage to India
• Sally Field in Places in the Heart 
• Jessica Lange in Country
• Vanessa Redgrave in The Bostonians
• Sissy Spacek in The River

Sorry for postponing 1988 (I hate doing it and I do things like this in emergency cases, which this is; it's going to be the next year and I'm saving the entry with the comments so you won't have to make new predictions) but a chance came to do 1984 and I instantly knew it's a now or never moment for me. :) Plus I'm positive that you're getting a Great Glenn and Meryl Streep overload on this blog. :)

What do you think? Who's your pick? What's your prediction for my ranking? :)  

454. Coriolanus

454. (02 Nov) Coriolanus (2011, Ralph Fiennes)* 62



The film's finest moments all involve Vanessa Redgrave. Her big speech late in the film is a master class in acting that all but assures her a seventh Oscar nod. She works brilliantly with Ralph Fiennes, who brings an extraordinary intensity to the role and turns Shakespeare's play into an action film. It's an updating in the vein of Loncraine's Richard III, only not as good.

ANONYMOUS

Written by John Orloff

Directed by Roland Emmerich 

Starring Rhys Ifans, David Thewlis and Vanessa Redgrave

Roland Emmerich is famous for directing disaster movies, like 2012 and INDEPENDENCE DAY. His latest, ANONYMOUS, is supposed to be a grand departure but it still felt an awful lot like a disaster to me. And what better way to distance yourself from a genre that practically ignores story completely, than to take on a story that attacks the character of one of the most famed storytellers of all time, William Shakespeare. Rhys Ifans stars as Edward De Vere, the 17th Earl of Oxford and, according to Emmerich, the actual writer of Shakespeare’s plays. It’s an interesting theory but one that Emmerich executes with about as much finesse and subtlety as one would expect from the man who rewrote history in 10,000 B.C. If I were Emmerich, I would have left my name off of this one.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1971

1971

So the much anticipated ranking is:

5. Vanessa Redgrave in Mary, Queen of Scots

Although I cannot deny that Vanessa's radiant presence impressed me, I cannot say the same thing about her performance as Mary Stuart. For some reason, I felt that she was lost in this character despite the fact that she completely understood this character. I had no connection to the character whatsoever but there's still something about Vanessa that holds me back from being really negative about her here.

4. Janet Suzman in Nicholas and Alexandra

Janet added some irresistable pride and even a bit of arrogancy to this character that never ceased to impress me and eventually, I don't have negative thoughts about her, I'm just disappointed and a bit angry about the wasted potential. It's almost haunting work and really great, it just could have been even better.

3. Glenda Jackson in Sunday Bloody Sunday

Glenda Jackson is just excellent as Alex Greville in Sunday Bloody Sunday. She shows lots of aspects of this character and she nails all the emotions of this character. Although I was never totally amazed by her, I was impressed by her work, especially in the scenes where she showed the demons of Alex.

2. Julie Christie in McCabe & Mrs. Miller

Despite the obvious limitations of the screenplay, Julie Christie was able to put on a wonderful, unforgettable and otherworldy performance as Constance Miller, the opium-addicted madam. Although it's a very unusual character for Julie, she played her exceptionally, making this one of her most memorable efforts on the screen.

1. Jane Fonda in Klute

I hope there was no question about it. First, I wanted to write a review only with the sentence "Best performance ever. Period." BUT then I thought that it wouldn't say enough about this stirring work of Jane and wouldn't be able to communicate what I felt as a viewer. I was moved, I cried, I even laughed at the small hints of humour that make her work even more amazing. Honestly, I just want to keep praising her and say as many superlatives about her as I can.

So I can proudly announce

my 40th winner is...

Jane Fonda

in

Klute

The best of the best.

Final thoughts: A good year. There wasn't much suspense as Jane killed her competition (plus she became my third double winner after Barbara Stanwyck and Liz Taylor). However, Julie and Glenda were also great and in another year, Julie would have got much closer to winning. Janet Suzman was the pleasant surprise for me and Vanessa was an unexpected disappointment for me. Really, there isn't much to say about this year as Jane is so easily the best. I admit that the others didn't have a chance though I was trying to be as impartial as possible.

Omissions: Ruth Gordon in Harold and Maude; Mari Törőcsik in Love, Lili Darvas in Love; Glenda Jackson in Mary, Queen of Scots

About the next year: I know I owe some of you years to do but given my circumstances, I'm just not able to search for films so I'm going to do a readily available year. I'll decide next week.

What do you think? Any thoughts on your mind?

Vanessa Redgrave in Mary, Queen of Scots

Vanessa Redgrave received her third Oscar for playing the tragic queen of Scotland, Mary Stuart. I think Vanessa didn't have much of a chance of winning the Oscar (nobody had a chance next to Jane Fonda) but I think she got ahead of Julie Christie and Janet Suzman as Vanessa was very popular, she was Oscarless and she got a Globe nod (unlike the others). Still, she couldn't edge out Glenda as many must have compared her performance to Glenda's in this movie (many prefer her, actually) plus Glenda's work in Sunday, Bloody Sunday was even better. So there were many setbacks for Vanessa's win.

"This is the story of the fierce struggle between... THE RIVAL QUEENS". What can you expect from a movie that starts with this line? Even the beginning suggest that we are about to see a soap opera with two rivalling monarchs, something in the style of Dynasty with Glenda Jackson and Vanessa Redgrave instead of Joan Collins and Linda Evans. At the time, many criticised this movie for its screenplay and rightfully so. It really is ludicrous sometimes plus I did not feel that the fight between the ladies was very even. Elizabeth got the third of Mary's storyline and she wasn't given the depth she would have deserved. For me, she's a far more interesting character than Mary. Glenda is simply wonderful as Elizabeth and I almost wished that the movie was only about her but then I quickly realised that she had her own miniseries (If only I could get that!). Still, I don't know why I expected much from the director of Anne of the Thousand Days.

This is only my second Best Actress review of Vanessa Redgrave and although I would not say that I'm that acquainted with her works, I feel that she's a terrific, shining, radiant talent who can elevate any movie she's in. I just think about her scene with Jane Fonda in the café from the movie Julia and I am just enthralled by her wonderful, radiant presence. Even in movies like Morgan!, she's able to deliver something special and really unique. She's the perfect embodiment of the so-called strong female characters. It would be so absurd to see her as a girl to be saved in an action flick. That's not Vanessa. I always imagine her as a tragic but ultimately poetic heroine who delivers uplifting monologues and breaks the viewer hearts while giving treats to the mind, too.

All these qualities make her the best choice for the character of Mary Stuart the dream role of many actresses. I think everything indicates a great performance coming from this movie and that's probably why I was so damn disappointed. There we go, I said it. Disappointment is the perfect word to describe my general feeling towards this performance. I was shocked to see how lost Vanessa was in this movie. This was almost completely the fault of the director who really didn't seem to care that much about the performances (that was also the case with Anne of the Thousand Days). He was pretty much satisfied when the actors delivered their long monologues loud and effectively. That's what results in overacting or total weakness. I think Glenda would have been lost, too had she not previously played the role of Elizabeth. For her, this one must have been very easy and she didn't have to make that much of an effort, she must have just recreated her legendary performance. However, Vanessa should and could have done far better, had it been for the advices. The same thing happened to Vanessa that would later be the case with Glenda Jackson in Hedda. The movie dragged her down.

Naturally, Vanessa doesn't benefit from the screenplay's varied badness. She gets very cheesy and sentimental lines that prevent her from making Mary a really interesting character. Although the movie shows some indecent things that Mary does, she's still very much like a complete saint despite the fact that she's just as much of a bitch as Elizabeth. Plus, if you're expecting delicious, entertaining catfights, you're not going to get them until very-very late into the movie and those scenes are not the best, either (in that way). However, I felt that the two actresses had a magnficent effect on each other. Whenever they are shown together, it's like a breath of fresh air in the film. Although Glenda sticks out for me more, Vanessa was really outstanding in those scenes (minus the moment where she wants to beat Glenda from the top of the horse, that one's ridiculous).

The highlights of the character are those scenes before (and during) the execution of Mary and Vanessa manages to solve them quite properly. I think they would have worked better on the stage (in fact, it would have been brilliant there), here they seemed to be a bit theatrical and over-the-top. Still, Vanessa is very good there and her final encounter with Elizabeth is just as memorable. But again: who do I prefer? Glenda. It might seem that I am hard to impress (not true) but I always heard the little devil in my head: "Glenda is so much better! She should have been nominated!"

Although I cannot deny that Vanessa's radiant presence impressed me, I cannot say the same thing about her performance as Mary Stuart. For some reason, I felt that she was lost in this character despite the fact that she completely understood this character. I had no connection to the character whatsoever but there's still something about Vanessa that holds me back from being really negative about her here.

What do you think?

My plans: Janet next Friday and Jane next Saturday! :) 

426. Anonymous

426. (04 Oct) Anonymous (2011, Roland Emmerich)* 35



Emmerich attempts to break into the prestige picture business, but is still up to old tricks. Anonymous is too briskly edited and overly structured to work as a compelling period piece. It's clear he thinks this is another Hollywood blockbuster, following his tired formula.

The core ideas about Shakespeare himself are convoluted and sometimes insulting reduce historical figures to caricature. King James is briefly shown in the finale as a fashion-obsessed, theater-loving queen. All this reduction eventually makes Anonymous into something that's pushy, joyless, and as far from the Bard as is imaginable.

Vanessa Redgrave's Elizabeth I is a particularly odd duck. Considering she witnessed Glenda Jackson acting the heck out of the role in Mary, Queen of Scots, it's not surprising Redgrave took another direction. Instead of the raging royal we're used to seeing portrayed, her Elizabeth I is neutered and senile. It's an odd choice, to be sure, and one that ultimately doesn't work. There's some interesting physicality in the performance, but it's perhaps the weakest she's ever given.

Her daughter Joely Richardson plays a younger Elizabeth I. All of these flashback scenes are all for naught, really. They're structured hideously and the young actors are weak imitations of their elders.

The costumes and sets are so-so, but it's almost astonishing how instantly forgettable this is. Attempts at romance and mawkish drama fail.

The Next Year

1971

So the nominees were:

• Julie Christie in McCabe & Mrs. Miller
• Jane Fonda in Klute
• Glenda Jackson in Sunday Bloody Sunday
• Vanessa Redgrave in Mary, Queen of Scots
• Janet Suzman in Nicholas and Alexandra

Since Joe is also doing this year, I hope you don't mind if I do it, too and it won't get boring for you. I was just sooooooooooo desperate to do this year (that was exactly 40 years ago) my 40th and I desperately wanted to make Jane's Klute my 200th reviewed performance (that's one of the most special Oscar nominees for me EVER and not because I'm a die-hard Fonda-fan, it was way before that). So for the 40th time...

What do you think? What's your ranking? What's your prediction for my ranking?

Note: The much-missed overall ranking will come after I finish this year, don't worry. I just have some trouble placing the ladies. Hopefully, my torture will end. :)

2011 Tony Predictions

I'm sorry, what?  This is Sam Watches Movies, not Sam Doesn't Watch Plays But Writes About Them.  But either way, I'm here to predict the Tony Awards for this upcoming Sunday evening.  Granted, while you read, I have not seen any of the shows and only heard the soundtrack to about half the musicals.  But you want to know the funny thing about predicting entertainment awards?  Seeing the performances doesn't even matter.

Overall this is a great year for Broadway.  A strong, and much-needed rebound after the horrid slate of nominees and qualifying shows that opened on the Great White Way.  So many original shows that's aren't jutebox musicals :-)

Here we go.  Comments on the ones which need commentary.

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role in a Play

Brian Bedford, The Importance of Being Earnest
Bobby Cannavale, The Motherf**ker with the Hat
Joe Mantello, The Normal Heart
Al Pacino, The Merchant of Venice
Mark Rylance, Jerusalem ***

(My gut is telling me two-time Directing winner Mantello, but I'm hearing that Rylance is remarkable.  In the end, I think how many awards the AIDS drama takes home will be contingent on whether the love it or respect it.  Mantello is ridiculously close.)

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role in a Play

Nina Arianda, Born Yesterday

Frances McDormand, Good People ***

Lily Rabe, The Merchant of Venice

Vanessa Redgrave, Driving Miss Daisy

Hannah Yelland, Brief Encounter

(My gut, again, is telling me newcomer Arianda is going to win for the Oscar-winning role of Billy Holiday, but I'm not seeing it actually happening.  McDormand is an Oscar champ, she's a working actress that people like, and the star of what is arguably the #2 in the Best Play race.  They may want to throw her a bone here.  Born Yesterday isn't even nominated in Best Revival.)

Best Performance by an Actor in a Leading Role in a Musical
Norbert Leo Butz, Catch Me If You Can
Josh Gad, The Book of Mormon ***
Joshua Henry, The Scottsboro Boys
Andrew Rannells, The Book of Mormon
Tony Sheldon, Priscilla Queen of the Desert

(Bar none, hands down this is hardest race to predict.  When Harry Potter Daniel Radcliffe was snubbed, this race became a horse race.  All but Henry have a chance.  Some are staying away from the Mormon men because of a vote-splitting theory, and are claiming it's down to past-winner (and from a show with two Best Actor nominees) Butz and Aussie newcomer Sheldon.  Both, however, are in shows that proved to have a lukewarm reception at the Tonys.  Butz's show is a Best Musical nominee, but curiously without a Book, Director, or Score representation.  Sheldon is in a flashy part, but he and the Costumes are the show's only nominations (in addition, there might be a Didn't We Do This Last Year sentiment with rewarding another drag portrayal.  I'm betting on Gad here, with his scene-stealing just barely besting Rannells' vocal chops.)

Best Performance by an Actress in a Leading Role in a Musical
Sutton Foster, Anything Goes ***
Beth Leavel, Baby It's You!
Patina Miller, Sister Act
Donna Murphy, The People in the Picture

(Some people say Miller, but I'm thinking Foster has it here.  Classic role, good reviews, dancing to drive you wild, and to boot she's one of the most consistent actors on Broadway.  She's due for a second one, I'd imagine.)

Best Performance by an Actor in a Featured Role in a Play
Mackenzie Crook, Jerusalem
Billy Crudup, Arcadia
John Benjamin Hickey, The Normal Heart ***
Arian Moayed, Bengal Tiger at the Baghdad Zoo
Yul Vázquez, The Motherf**ker with the Hat

Best Performance by an Actress in a Featured Role in a Play

Ellen Barkin, The Normal Heart ***

Edie Falco, The House of Blue Leaves

Judith Light, Lombardi

Joanna Lumley, La Bête

Elizabeth Rodriguez, The Motherf**ker with the Hat

(Here is where I--and most pundits--think The Normal Heart will show up with a vengeance. Hickey is the last remaining principle actor for the iconic 1998 revival of Cabaret to be Tony-less (aside from the show's half-Oscar-winning directing duo Sam Mendes and Rob Marshall).  Barkin got glowing reviews, and with Falco's show getting mostly and backhandedly panned, I think that'll be enough to make Barkin a Tony winner.)

Best Performance by an Actor in a Featured Role in a Musical
Colman Domingo, The Scottsboro Boys
Adam Godley, Anything Goes
John Larroquette, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying ***
Forrest McClendon, The Scottsboro Boys
Rory O'Malley, The Book of Mormon

(The most surprising thing here on nomination morning were the snubs of two Broadway vets returning to the stage.  John Collum for The Scottsboro Boys and Joel Grey for Anything Goes.  With both of those men gone, the race is down to an epic Emmy champ and a newcomer from the hottest show in years.  In the end, I'm wondering if Larroquette's lackluster singing prowess and technically-critical reviews will hamper his chances, giving way for O'Malley to ride the Mormon wagon to the winner's circle.  I just don't know.  Currently, I'm predicting Larroquette.)

Best Performance by an Actress in a Featured Role in a Musical
Laura Benanti, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown
Tammy Blanchard, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
Victoria Clark, Sister Act
Nikki M. James, The Book of Mormon ***
Patti LuPone, Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown

(Benanti won the Drama Desk and seems to be the only actress on Broadway who's okay flaunting around her sexuality no matter where she goes.  Finally becoming a Tony-winner a mere three years ago, I don't see her winning this time.  Drama Desk voters are not Tony voters; Tony voters vote for things that they could have seen in May and April, when they're catching up on shows that they didn't bother to see the other 11 months of the year.  Benanti's show closed forever ago.  Watch out for the female standout James to accept the Tony Sunday night.)

Best Book of a Musical

Bloody Bloody Andrew Jackson

The Book of Mormon ***

The Scottsboro Boys

Sister Act

Best Original Score

The Book of Mormon ***

The Scottsboro Boys

Sister Act

Women on the Verge of a Nervous Breakdown

(Again, these are pretty much a slam dunk.  Book and Score often go together and when the Best Musical frontrunner is represented in both, it tends to have a good shot.  I'm betting the South Park boys best the final musical collaboration between theatre legends Kander and Ebb.)

Best Direction of a Play
Marianne Elliott and Tom Morris, War Horse
Joel Grey & George C. Wolfe, The Normal Heart ***
Anna D. Shapiro, The Motherf**ker with the Hat
Daniel Sullivan, The Merchant of Venice

(Nearly Everyone is predicting Elliot and Morris to win for their puppet mastery in War Horse, but I'm betting the voters go for visceral emotional effect over dazzling visual harmony.  Plus Grey and Wolfe are heavy-hitters in the community.  Grey, at over 80 did 8 shows a week and directed a show.  Pretty impressive for someone who hasn't won a Tony since the Johnson administration.)

Best Direction of a Musical
Rob Ashford, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
Kathleen Marshall, Anything Goes
Casey Nicholaw and Trey Parker, The Book of Mormon ***
Susan Stroman, The Scottsboro Boys

(Lock. Srsly).

Best Choreography
Rob Ashford, How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying
Kathleen Marshall, Anything Goes ***
Casey Nicholaw, The Book of Mormon
Susan Stroman, The Scottsboro Boys

(All I read about Anything Goes was the stirring tap dance numbers.  I reckon Marshall has it.  Interestingly enough, though, all four of these Choreographers are not only the directors of their shows this year, but have all worked with Sutton Foster in the past.  Ashford on Thoroughly Modern Millie, Marshall on Anything Goes, Nicholaw on The Drowsy Chaperone, and Stroman on Young Frankenstein. You welcome for that Sunday night Look How Smart I Am tidbit when the category is announced.)

Best Musical

The Book of Mormon ***

Catch Me If You Can

The Scottsboro Boys

Sister Act

Best Play

Good People

Jerusalem

The Motherfucker with the Hat

War Horse***

(As with the Best Musical race, the Best Play race is totally devoid of drama.  Both War Horse and Book of Mormon are locks to win the final two awards of the evening.)

Best Revival of a Play

Arcadia

The Importance of Being Earnest

The Merchant of Venice

The Normal Heart ***

Best Revival of a Musical

Anything Goes ***

How to Succeed in Business Without Really Trying

(Oddly, much like the Best Play and Best Musical races, these Revival races are just as secure.  Nothing is beating The Normal Heart or Anything Goes.)

And that's it.  Tell your friends.  This is 100% right, trust me.

The Final Conclusion - Best Actress 1966

About the field: Well, I expected more from this year and yet I wasn't disappointed. I liked all of the performances and all of the movies (except for Morgan, which was...). My #1 was such an easy win both here and in real life. It's one of those cases when the actress wins for the career-best, right movie. #2 and #5 was also quite easy, however I had some hard time deciding who should be #3. I'm glad that it turned out this way, which I really did not expect. I was quite certain that my #3 becomes #2 before I wrote my review. However, anything can happen, seasons change. Let's see the ranking:

5. Vanessa Redgrave in Morgan: A Suitable Case for Treatment

After all, I just feel that I don't have much to say about Vanessa Redgrave in this movie. She's great as usual (and that's going to be rewarded), but the movie is working against her as if she was on a boat during a hurricane.

4. Ida Kaminska in The Shop on the Main Street

In the end I can say that Ida Kaminska gave an excellent performance, which might be a bit uneven achievement and borderline supporting, but you instantly like the character, care about her and she just breaks your heart in the end. It's a great performance in a movie for the ages.

3. Anouk Aimée in A Man and a Woman

In the end, I can say that I loved Anouk Aimée in this one very much, but sometimes I felt that her performance lacked something and wasn't constantly strong. It's an extremely simple, beautiful, clean and loveable work to which the viewer can easily connect.

2. Lynn Redgrave in Georgy Girl

I must say that I was impressed by Lynn Redgrave's performance as the innocent Georgy, who has many layers and a real depth, though sometimes the performance was not constantly strong. Great and effective work, which even moved me, but I guess I wanted a bit more.

1. Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

The writing flies away, but Taylor's performance stays with me forever, locked up firmly in my mind. An actress, who was able to show another, unknown and much more interesting side of hers, now really got me. I'm under its effect and I can't be sober. Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant.

So I can proudly announce

that my winner is...

Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

Easy win, Ms. Taylor

The ranking of the already reviewed years:

1. 1974
2. 1989
3. 1959
4. 1939
5. 2009
6. 1963
7. 1966
8. 1990
9. 1978
10. 1954
11. 1948
12. 2002
13. 1940
14. 1998

About the next year: it was so complicated to choose the next year, but after all I picked a brilliant one I really look forward to reviewing. Unfortunately I cannot do posts until next Friday, but after that there's going to be a lot of time. Let's see the clues:

• Dancing queen...
• To Miss with Love (?)
• Don't lose your head! (Sorry)

So what do you think? Any thoughts, request, anything on your mind?

P.S.: Please comment on Ida's profile. :)

Vanessa Redgrave in Morgan: A Suitable Case for Treatment

Vanessa Redgrave received her first Oscar nomination for playing Leonie Delt in Morgan. Wow, I have absolutely no idea how much chance Redgrave had of winning the Oscar. I think she was the fourth eventually as I think Elizabeth Taylor ruled the competition with Lynn Redgrave and Anouk Aimée as runners-up for the prize. That being said, after 1966 (the) Redgrave(s) became world-famous and gave us many great performances.

Morgan is such a weird movie and I have so many ambivalent feelings about it. Sometimes it's simply intolerable to watch and so weird, that it's really unnecessary. However, there were times when I enjoyed it to a degree and that's mostly due to the fact that I am a huge Carry On! fan and was extremely pleased to see Bernard Bresslaw, who actually gave the most entertaining performance. Karel Reisz is an interesting and great director, but this was quite a mixed bag. I am really fond of free cinema, but this movie was not my cup of tea.

Vanessa Redgrave is an extremely strange case here. She's quite probably the most original and uniquely brilliant actress of the silver screen (along with Tilda Swinton probably) and I really mean this. She has such a beautiful presence and face, it has such a radiant quality in it. It's not a co-incidence that Katharine Hepburn really admired her. If you see Vanessa Redgrave, you just CANNOT take your eyes off her. Even with the smallest, most minimal role she's able to create something memorable (see Atonement as a proof).

However, in this movie she's really not my cup of tea. Actually, she has that previously mentioned radiant quality, but her role as Leonie is just rotten. That's it, it's such a stupid material that she just cannot be very impressive. In addition, the movie mostly concentrates on the character of Morgan and Leonie is co-lead at best. The screentimes is working against Vanessa and unfortunately, she just can't do very much about it. When she's not there, she's not there and I have a feeling that something is missing. It's too bad.

The character of Leonie is so hard to understand as she really doesn't make any sense. I just did not know where to put her, I wasn't even sure if I should take her seriously. Plus I never really found out if she still had some feelings for Morgan. It's so confusing overall and no matter how much I tried, I really did not understand her. I wanted to know so much about her, but there wasn't anything. I think the writer must have thought, Morgan is the main character, why the hell should I write a whole story for Leonie? And that's it. Redgrave is just not able to build a palace with crap. That's it.

Miraculously, after a while, I was captivated simply by the beauty and immense presence of Vanessa Redgrave. I just fell in love with her after a while. I fell in love with Vanessa and not Leonie. I just felt that, yes, I waited for this, this is that very anticipated feeling. Slowly, but firmly, Vanessa just impressed me with her talent. Unfortunately, that feeling was not constant as she almost disappears in the end, it just got lost somewhere. It was a great feeling though when it lasted.

After all, I just feel that I don't have much to say about Vanessa Redgrave in this movie. She's great as usual (and that's going to be rewarded), but the movie is working against her as if she was on a boat during a hurricane. It is worth watching however to see Vanessa's immense beauty and enormous talent. The rating seems to be higher than expected, but actually the effort is a 5.

More of a 3.7, but I give it a 4 after all.

What do you think? It's time to give your last predictions!

The Next Year

After closing a poll, the conclusion was obvious: you wanted me to do 1966, so let's just go ahead with it. It's a very popular and yet not frequently talked about race. Everyone praises Taylor, but all the nominees have their fans. But let's just start:

1966

So the nominees were:

• Anouk Aimée in A Man and a Woman
• Ida Kaminska in The Shop on the Main Street
• Lynn Redgrave in Georgy Girl
• Vanessa Redgrave in Morgan
• Elizabeth Taylor in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?

So what do you think? What are your predictions (the contest is naturally on)? Who's your pick? What's your ranking?

P.S. I am not sure how frequent the posts will be but I'll do my best.

Natasha Richardson Filmography

Natasha Jane Richardson, 1963-2009
Update: at Bravo's A-List awards on 4.15, Natasha was named "Humanitarian of the Year" for her AIDS work, and am/FAR named an AIDS fund after her

Natasha Richardson was the actress daughter of actress Vanessa Redgrave and director Tony Richardson, and sister of actress Miranda Richardson; she was also the wife of actor Liam Neeson. She was tragically killed in