Predictions in Actressing: Few Locks, Many New Variables
Friday, October 5, 2012 at 8:00PM 
It's entirely redundant to tell you that Best Actress and Best Supporting Actress are The Film Experience's favorite Oscar categories. This year's field continues to feel slippery, amorphous, unknowable which is... great. It should be hard to pin down the Oscar race before films have been widely seen and release dates have fully settled. The charts this month are quite shuffled so I hope you'll devour them.
ACTRESS Most pundits have assumed since the very beginning that Cotillard and Wallis were locked up done deals but I'm actually still not comfortable inking either of them in. They could happen, sure, but there are so many contenders and no one beyond Jennifer Lawrence (having one of those mega years that's impossible to deny) has cemented a position here. Especially with all the movement. Even one of these smaller films with rising stars (Olsen, Winstead, Fanning) could happen theoretically or at least siphon key votes if audiences and critics are kind and their campaign is strong.
We should note that little Quvenzhané Wallis has a new problem beyond her very young age in that SAG won't be nominating her (declaring the cast ineligible). Cotillard also has a significant problem in that she isn't the only reknowned actress killing it in a subtitled drama. Emmanuelle Riva anyone? The Hiroshima Mon Amour star is a powerhouse in a very difficult role in Amour. I've just seen the movie so perhaps it's wishful thinking but this is very moving work.
SUPPORTING ACTRESS The big new question mark for me is whether biopic mimicry -- Scarlett Johansson doing Janet Leigh's arched brow Psycho tics -- will finally win her Oscar attention after her breakthrough early misses nine years ago (Girl with the Pearl Earring and Lost in Translation... and to a lesser extent her Woody Allen hussy in Match Point). She stopped being an actress for awhile moving straight to über celebrity but after her Tony-winning run on Broadway and renewed vigor in her filmography, this could be the year. Or will various Psycho co-stars steal the spotlight. It's worth noting that Toni Collette can steal spotlights from anyone anywhere... and if her Hitchcock assistant role has a key scene or two that she can wow in, watch out! (That's a mighty big "if" of course in a film with stars this big playing famous Hollywood icons.)
I should also note that though I'm on the record as no fan of Helen Hunt's 90s Oscar win, I found her work in The Sessions to be very strong. To me it's unquestionably a leading role (it wouldn't be if we didn't spend time with her outside of the titular sessions but we do, making this a lopsided duet) and I'm a bit curious as to why Fox Searchlight so adamantly settled on a supporting campaign so early given that a lead Actress nod still doesn't seem unattainable for this previous winner.
Reader Comments (56)
Marcos, according to many sources:
Hitchcock centers on the relationship between director Alfred Hitchcock and his wife Alma Reville during the making of Psycho, spanning from Wisconsin murderer Ed Gein, the real-life inspiration for the character of Norman Bates, to the release of the groundbreaking film in 1960.
If that's true, Mirren is a co-lead, a la "The Last Station", also with Maggie Smith and Helen Hunt competing in the supporting category, Fox Searchlight is full of contenders in that category, and in leading, only Wallis.
Around Knightley, maybe I speak for my commonly dislike of her, but I don't think she's a sure bet as many people think? She has good notes, but the film is having a polarized response and the UK Box office was mixed than expecting. Maybe in USA could be better, but with big competition -Lincoln, SLP, Rust & Bone and other films- maybe Anna Karenina will have a lukewarm response in USA
Best Actress:
Lawrence
Wallis
Cotillard
Mirren
Streep
Nathaniel,
I always love reading your Oscar predictions. We don't always agree and I tend to diverge from common expectations with my own predictions (which I don't write about nearly as often as you do). While I find some of your rationale for your Best Actress predictions interesting, the roster of five you have just feels plain wrong to me. With Smith and Riva, the category skews too old. With Wallis and Lawrence, the category skews too young. Mirren is always a safe bet, at least for early consideration. Other than that, it feels off. Here's my thinking:
1. I love Riva's work, although I'm a little cooler on Amour than most critics, but her age and health issues may make it impossible for her to travel extensively in the U.S. to do press, so no matter how hard Sony Classic pushes it will still be an uphill battle. Also, it is usually only the foreign language performances with the most obvious Oscar bait qualities that get nominated (ie. Marion Cotillard in La Vie En Rose).
2. Maggie Smith is far from the best work in Quartet. That would be Pauline Collins and I think Collins might be the extent of Oscar love for that pic.
3. I loved Beasts of the Southern Wild, but I'm not expecting either Actress or Best Picture nods for that. I think Screenplay is about it.
4. Hyde Park on the Hudson is pretty terrible in my mind. (I really hated it.) And Linney has very little to do in the movie. She'd be better in the supporting category but I don't think she would score even there.
5. I think people are underestimating The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel. The Academy has loved Judi Dench to the tune of six previous nominations. Since Woody Allen's To Rome with Love was not the critical or box office hit that Midnight in Paris was, I feel that Best Exotic could easily find Academy support as the big indie hit of summer. I'm even predicting a Best Picture nod in a 10-wide field.
6. I would push Helen Hunt into Best Actress from supporting because The Sessions is all about the dynamic between her and John Hawkes. As a former Oscar winner, she should certainly get a lot more consideration than some of the longer shot possibilities.
MY PREDICTIONS: Right now, my five Best Actress contenders are Jennifer Lawrence, Judi Dench, Helen Mirren, Helen Hunt and Keira Knightley (great performance - romantic, emotionally tortured, sexual, right age to appeal to horny older male Academy voters, etc.)
Regards,
Jonathan Lewis
Ok now i hate Jennifer Lawrence and I'm a weird because i give my opignon? I've never said Jennifer Lawrence was terrible or a bad actress at all! Actually, believe it or not, I really like her but that's not the point. All i said was that, for me, Marion gave a stronger performance and i think she is more skillful than Lawrence only because she has more experience and maturity.
Though you never actually said that JL is a bad actress, all your comments about her were to compare her to Marion, and how she was not as talented. Your tone was derisive, unflattering, and certainly implied a dislike for Lawrence. Your outrightly state that you were pissed off because Lawrence and Wallis are considered front runners for nominations and therefore felt that Marion was going to be shunted aside in their favor. You even go so far as to say that JL is not worthy of a nomination, stating that MC is more worthy due to her past credentials!
Least you forget, the Oscars are about celeberating and honoring excellence for achievements in the film industry. If an actor gives an outstanding performance, s/he should be recognized with a nomination, irregardless of his/her past film credentials.
You also try and make a case that JL's role in SLP is really supporting, citing that she doesn't have enough screentime. This is false and indicates to me that you actually haven't seen SLP and are just parroting some other comments floating around regarding JL and SLP. JL is in easily 85% to 90% of the movie and is the romantic leading lady and the emotional anchor of the film. She is definitely leading and not supporting, in my opinion.
You then go on to compare how Marion would have performed better in SLP and how Jennifer would have faltered in R&B. Honestly, how can all your comments on ths not be perceived as anti JL? I think you're doing some serious back peddling here because you've been called out on your pro Marion agenda.
About Wallis and the comments that her performance is really "due to the director"... The same thing was said about Tatum O'Neal's performace in "Paper Moon". It was even common knowledge from the very beginning that Bogdanovich had recorded all her dialogue (inflections, timing. etc) for her and she learned it by repetition and "mimicking". And yet she won the Oscar!
And it continues to be one of the more controversial wins to this day! Personally, I think Anna Paquin is the true youngest oscar winner because she actually acted and wasn't so coached into a manipulative performance.
Should Wallis actually be nominated, I doubt she'll actually win. AMPAS voters are unlikley to award one of their highest accolades to such a young girl, who is really still very much a child. Even if Wallis is fantastic, the rest of the competition would have to be extraordinarly weak in order for her to win. Since the other candidates in contention aren't, it's not going to happen.
Jonathan, at seems right now, Helen Hunt will be in contention for the supporting actress category -Even if she's co-lead-. I seriously doubt, with Dench -If TBEMH is a hit-, Mirren and Wallis as a contenders in the leading category, Fox Searchlight will put Hunt in the leading category -Actually it would be more dangerous for her Oscar consideration-. These changes only happens when there's not real contenders, and Fox is full in both categories.
Hey Nathaniel - Saw the Master and just not getting the Amy Adams praise. Solid performance for sure, but it seems like Adams is getting the default nomination in that category these days.