Best Actress:
- Glenn Close (Albert Nobbs)
- Viola Davis (The Help)
- Rooney Mara (The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo)
- Meryl Streep (The Iron Lady)
- Michelle Williams (My Week with Marilyn)
The big competition is in these 2 top acting categories. It's Meryl vs Viola for Best Actress, and Jean vs George in Best Actor, but I'll cover the latter tomorrow. Meryl Streep played Margaret Thatcher, both as a young(ish) woman, a woman in her 60's and an Alzheimer-riddled 90 year old. She was great as the younger Thatcher, speaking very regally and saying these inspirational quotes, I didn't completely buy it. Something about it reminded me of her role in Julie and Julia, and some other films. It was great (because its Meryl) but I was always thinking Meryl rather than Margaret. However, Meryl as the 90 year old woman is where she completely shines. She looks, acts, talks like an old woman. She completely nails it, from the shaky hands, to the slow hunched walk, and even in the makeup. Then we have Viola. Viola played Aibileen, a black maid in Mississippi in the 1950's (or 60s?). She is a woman she is sick and tired of how her and the other maids are being treated, how Hilly Holbrook is making things even worse by making them have their own toilets, and how the children love her but when they grow up, they become their mamas. She teams up with a young woman named Skeeter, who's writing a book from the point of view of the Help. Viola Davis was fantastic in this role, through and through. We can see in her face how worn she is, and how broken. But there is a power behind her too, and Viola is able to carry off both parts of Aibileen. But who will win? Right now Viola and Meryl are pretty neck in neck. Viola has the Critics Choice Award and the SAG, while Meryl has the BAFTA and the Golden Globe. Many people say Meryl is overdue for her 3rd Oscar, having not won in 29 years. Viola Davis has been nominated before, in 2009, without a win. Will the Academy choose the honor Viola, making her only the 2nd Black Woman to win Best Actress? Or will they go with Meryl, finally giving her her 3rd Oscar (Honestly, she should've won for Julia Child, that was just fantastic). I'm leaning towards Viola taking the win, here. She had a strong performance, and Meryl already holding 2 Oscars might be against her. However, it's anyone's race, although as much as I love Meryl Streep, I'm rooting hardcore for Viola, and will be really upset if she doesn't win.
Will Win: Viola Davis
Could Win: Meryl Streep
Dark Horse: Rooney Mara
Who I Want to Win: Viola Davis
Showing posts with label the iron lady. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the iron lady. Show all posts
Winner Breakdown: Best Actress
Thursday, February 23, 2012
Labels:
best actress,
Meryl Streep,
the academy awards,
The Help,
the iron lady,
the oscars,
Viola Davis
Winner Breakdown: Makeup
Friday, February 10, 2012
Makeup:
- Albert Nobbs
- Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 2
- The Iron Lady
I think this is a pretty solid category, to be honest. There's not really any clear winner, as all are extremely strong competitors. Albert Nobbs, while I haven't seen it, just seeing Glenn Close as a man shows how well the makeup was done. Close truly looked like a male, and she is very feminine looking in real life. Harry Potter, I'm shocked it hasn't been nominated for make-up before, especially for something like the first or second film. This film was have an array of make-up for battle wounds, for goblins, and for Voldemort. While many people think it's mostly CGI, it really isn't (see photo of Fiennes in makeup here: http://www.filmonair.com/img/video/harrypotter7_voldermortsmakeup_hd.jpg). And even Hagrid and Dumbledore. Both wonderful. And finally, we have The Irony Lady, who transformed Meryl Streep into an elderly lady. The make-up, here too, was quite flawless, and Meryl looked utterly convincing as an old woman, with thick wrists and ankles, and wrinkles and liver spots. Who will win? I'd say it's a big showdown between The Iron Lady and Harry Potter, but I'm really hoping Harry Potter can take it. The make-up was truly flawless there, and this win will make it Potter's first (and possibly only) win at the Oscars, ever. I wouldn't count The Iron Lady out though. Nor Albert Nobbs.
Will Win: Harry Potter
Could Win: The Iron Lady
Dark Horse: Albert Nobbs
Who I Want to Win: Harry Potter
Labels:
2012,
Alan Rickman,
Albert Nobbs,
best makeup,
Glenn Close,
Harry Potter,
Meryl Streep,
Ralph Fiennes,
the academy awards,
the iron lady,
the oscars
The Iron Lady
Friday, February 3, 2012
The Iron Lady, 2011
Directed by Phyllida Lloyd
Nominations Include: Best Actress (Meryl Streep), Best Makeup
Synopsis: Margaret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister in England. This is her story, told in flashbacks as an elderly woman, dealing with Alzheimer's. We see a recount of her life before politics, her first campaign, the trials, the triumphs, her family, and her end.
Honestly, the only reason why I wanted to see this film because I've been solidly rooting for Viola Davis to win Best Actress, and wanted to see if she really, honestly stood a chance up against Meryl.
I hate to be a real downer on this movie, but I thought it had great potential, but it was executed badly. It covered too large a range of Mrs. Thatcher's life, ranging from "last year of high school-getting into Oxford" right up until her resignation, as well as her life as a confused elderly woman, seeing visions of her long dead husband. Had the director picked a certain time in Margaret Thatcher's life, this would've been done well. For instance, we get a look at 24 year old Margaret Roberts, trying to win her way into being considered by the conservative party, meeting her husband, losing her first election, and getting engaged. These scenes I found enchanting, and the young woman playing Margaret (Alexandra Roach) was very, very good, and looked so much likeMeryl Margaret. Had these scenes of her trying to become accepted as a real politician and her love life/courtship/engagement with Dennis been played out, it would've been a nice film. Or even her run for Prime Minister, with a small bit of introduction to get to know her first. Instead we got a lot of old Margaret Thatcher talking to her dead husband, her entire political lifestory, and then, finally, halfway through, she decides to run for Prime Minister.
One thing I did very much like was that the film didn't pick a side about Margaret Thatcher. They showed the good and the bad. They showed the bad choices she made, and the consequences, and they showed her triumphs and her passion. They really showed that, in the end, she did what she believed in, she didn't let herself be pushed around by someone lower than her, or someone "more intelligent", and showing both sides was admirable.
Now, to the acting. Like I mentioned previously, I thought young Margaret Thatcher was quite talented. She was authoritative enough, but also was believable. She pulled off confidence and passion very well. The home videos scenes were darling, seeing her as a mother and wife, and a happy, cheery woman. You could see both sides of this woman and I quite enjoyed her, though small her part was. Young Dennis was also dashing, and just very charming, much like Jim Broadbent, playing older Dennis Thatcher. I thought he was really, really good, and quite underrated. I'd have liked to see him up for Best Supporting Actor in the particular weak year of Supporting Actors, but alas.

And now, to Meryl. As all have said, she was great. But I must sligthly, slightly disagree. I thought was great, but only when she was playing older Margaret. She nailed being an old, confused woman so well, it was just so believable, and I bought into it every time she was on screen. However, playing the younger version, was not as phenomenal. For a lot of it I felt she was Meryl Streep, with a British accent, dressed up as Margaret Thatcher, who had a lot of inspirational things to say. While I thought she exuded so much power, and passion, and she really was Iron, I could see Meryl in everything about it. Many times I was even seeing her portrayal of Julia Child in some things she did. Not to say her performance was bad. Not by a long shot, but she truly excelled as playing an old woman, while her other parts were great, but not amazing like I thought it would be.
Another thought, was the makeup in this film was just whatever, except for when it came to Meryl Streep's age makeup. Her aged make-up was quite phenomenal, and is done just so right. You can hardly recognize Meryl under there, but it is just so flawless. I was rooting for Harry Potter to win make-up, and while I still am, I think it just might go to this film.
Overall, I thought the film was just sort of meh. When asked how I like it, all I could respond with was a shrug. I thought it had a lot of potential to be great, but it really failed to do anything with this film. There was not a whole lot of character development being shown, which hindered the film greatly. It just covered too wide a span to have any real effect. It almost felt documentary like at some times. But overall, not a terrible film, but not a good one. I was surprised to see it was only 1 1/2 hours, after feeling like I had watched a film over 2 hours. Not bad, not good. Am I still on team Viola? Oh yes, I am.
6/10
Directed by Phyllida Lloyd
Nominations Include: Best Actress (Meryl Streep), Best Makeup
Synopsis: Margaret Thatcher was the first female Prime Minister in England. This is her story, told in flashbacks as an elderly woman, dealing with Alzheimer's. We see a recount of her life before politics, her first campaign, the trials, the triumphs, her family, and her end.
Honestly, the only reason why I wanted to see this film because I've been solidly rooting for Viola Davis to win Best Actress, and wanted to see if she really, honestly stood a chance up against Meryl.
I hate to be a real downer on this movie, but I thought it had great potential, but it was executed badly. It covered too large a range of Mrs. Thatcher's life, ranging from "last year of high school-getting into Oxford" right up until her resignation, as well as her life as a confused elderly woman, seeing visions of her long dead husband. Had the director picked a certain time in Margaret Thatcher's life, this would've been done well. For instance, we get a look at 24 year old Margaret Roberts, trying to win her way into being considered by the conservative party, meeting her husband, losing her first election, and getting engaged. These scenes I found enchanting, and the young woman playing Margaret (Alexandra Roach) was very, very good, and looked so much like
One thing I did very much like was that the film didn't pick a side about Margaret Thatcher. They showed the good and the bad. They showed the bad choices she made, and the consequences, and they showed her triumphs and her passion. They really showed that, in the end, she did what she believed in, she didn't let herself be pushed around by someone lower than her, or someone "more intelligent", and showing both sides was admirable.
Now, to the acting. Like I mentioned previously, I thought young Margaret Thatcher was quite talented. She was authoritative enough, but also was believable. She pulled off confidence and passion very well. The home videos scenes were darling, seeing her as a mother and wife, and a happy, cheery woman. You could see both sides of this woman and I quite enjoyed her, though small her part was. Young Dennis was also dashing, and just very charming, much like Jim Broadbent, playing older Dennis Thatcher. I thought he was really, really good, and quite underrated. I'd have liked to see him up for Best Supporting Actor in the particular weak year of Supporting Actors, but alas.

And now, to Meryl. As all have said, she was great. But I must sligthly, slightly disagree. I thought was great, but only when she was playing older Margaret. She nailed being an old, confused woman so well, it was just so believable, and I bought into it every time she was on screen. However, playing the younger version, was not as phenomenal. For a lot of it I felt she was Meryl Streep, with a British accent, dressed up as Margaret Thatcher, who had a lot of inspirational things to say. While I thought she exuded so much power, and passion, and she really was Iron, I could see Meryl in everything about it. Many times I was even seeing her portrayal of Julia Child in some things she did. Not to say her performance was bad. Not by a long shot, but she truly excelled as playing an old woman, while her other parts were great, but not amazing like I thought it would be.
Another thought, was the makeup in this film was just whatever, except for when it came to Meryl Streep's age makeup. Her aged make-up was quite phenomenal, and is done just so right. You can hardly recognize Meryl under there, but it is just so flawless. I was rooting for Harry Potter to win make-up, and while I still am, I think it just might go to this film.
Overall, I thought the film was just sort of meh. When asked how I like it, all I could respond with was a shrug. I thought it had a lot of potential to be great, but it really failed to do anything with this film. There was not a whole lot of character development being shown, which hindered the film greatly. It just covered too wide a span to have any real effect. It almost felt documentary like at some times. But overall, not a terrible film, but not a good one. I was surprised to see it was only 1 1/2 hours, after feeling like I had watched a film over 2 hours. Not bad, not good. Am I still on team Viola? Oh yes, I am.
6/10
Labels:
2011,
Jim Broadbent,
Meryl Streep,
the academy awards,
the iron lady,
the oscars
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
