Oscar's reigning quartet to present, as is the tradition.
Wednesday, February 1, 2017 at 8:00PM I've somehow never seen this photo of Mark Rylance trying not to step on Brie Larson's train. Adorable.
AMPAS has announced that last year's acting winners will each be presenting on Oscar night. One assumes they will present their corresponding opposite-sex category as is the tradition, but who knows. Perhaps Oscar will mix it up. I'm all for tradition at the Oscars, don'cha know, but I don't mind a curveball now and then. You?
Alicia Vikander is back on screens February 24th (Oscar weekend!) with long delayed costume drama Tulip Fever in which she dumps Christoph Waltz for Dane DeHaan because who wouldn't.
Brie Larson is back on screens April 21st in the ensemble crime comedy Free Fire, from Ben Wheatley (High-Rise).
Mark Rylance is back on screens July 21st in Chris Nolan's WW II epic Dunkirk.
...and Leonardo DiCaprio is back on screens in... 2018? 2019? 2020? He appears to have taken a whole victory year off after winning the Oscar and still has no immediate plans to be in front of the camera. It was just announced that he'll headline The Black Hand because what the world really needs more of is mafia movies (sigh) but in truth that one is a long way off since there's no screenplay yet. There's also the possibility of the Olympic bombing movie The Ballad of Richard Jewell which Leo was once set to star in but might only be producing now. Whatever happened to The Devil in the White City with Martin Scorsese? That project was announced just over a year ago and not a peep since. If they've dropped it, I hope it becomes a miniseries instead because that book is dense with information, history, cause and effect through lines, and reams of characters.
Reader Comments (35)
Surprise! I was convinced that Rylance would come up with a silly excuse like "I'm doing a play in Cardiff" or something to avoid the ceremony.
I don't love any of the performances of that quartet. I really don't. Usually there's one that compensates the other three.
Leo has been attached to a lot of potential films with no directors or screenwriters attached as of late. I'm aware a lot of people don't care for him and I get why, but I'm disappointed he seems to have taken a break from acting. I was one of the few who liked him in The Revenant and felt his performance was more than just suffering. I thought he was quite mature, humble, and sensitive in the portions of the film that allowed him to act and express emotions with his eyes. Obviously I wish he won for The Wolf of Wall Street instead but I really do feel he is underrated in The Revenant.
The Richard Jewell movie is a Jonah Hill vehicle DiCaprio is producing.
I am all here for Mark Rylance presenting Viola Davis' Oscar.
I really like the bit where five past winners are there to fete a new winner. Wish they would revive it again.
Rylance was great.
Leo, Alicia and Brie leave something to be desired. I adore Brie but of the nominees last year she was clearly 4th- Rampling, Blanchett and Ronan were leagues better. But, as best actress goes, the young hot ones have the edge. She never would have won if she were a man going against performances of the same caliber as blanchett, Rampling and Ronan.
I wouldn't have voted for her, but I did love Brie last year. Leo's win seems a bit "Color of Money" and the supporting performances are two fine actors in middling films/roles.
Maybe each winner will present to the same sex instead. That would avoid the whole Brie Larson potentially presenting to Casey Affleck.
They were an appropriate winning quartet for a meh year.
This year really should be Huppert, Washington, Ali and Williams (given the nominees, that is). Gravitas, international, some indie-cred, all over 35, diverse...
With the image above you see why some say Brie Larson and Alicia Vikander are the same person.
The Best Actor lineup was weak so I had no problem with DiCaprio winning. I think he had the best nominated performance. I never got why everyone went nuts over Fassbender in Steve Jobs. I preferred Damon to him too.
Alicia's win remains the worst. If a frauded performance had to win the Oscar should've been Rooney Mara's. And if there was no Mara it still doesn't change the fact Jennifer Jason Leigh was the best SUPPORTING performance out of that lineup.
Can we just re-write history already and agree that Alicia won for Ex-machina instead last year. Then everyone would be happy.
"Tulip Fever in which she dumps Christoph Waltz for Dane DeHaan because who wouldn't"
Lolllllllllllllllll
This really was a dull lineup. I wasn't enthusiastic about any of them. If I can't get excited about even the two actresses winning, then I usually don't look forward to the ceremony all that much. This was the least interested in both actress winners, and the acting winners overall, since I started following the Oscars heavily as a kid, almost a decade ago.
Brie is a good actress but I didn't care much about Room, or her in it tbh.
And of the actually supporting supporting actress nominees, Kate Winslet should've won her second.
Is Dane Dehaan (still) a thing? It seemed like he was poised to break out, a Leonardo DiCaprio for the Millennial set, and then...nothing.
Huh - very well said. The only performance I can in good faith say Larson was comfortably better was Jlaw getting her oblig nomination for JOY.
I like Jonah Hill a hell of a lot more than the vast majority of this site's readership, I know, so I'm aware I'm probably in the minority here, but I'm still blissing out at Jonah's excitement when he read out Emma Stone's name at the SAGs on Sunday. I love that they got Donnie to deputise for Jordan in terms of presenting duties, too.
Does anyone else think that in terms of collective thirst for Oscars, last year, Leo, Felicia and Brie's aggregated thirst trumped that of any preceding campaign?
Their eagerness to win was even more stark when compared to Rylance's non-campaign. He didn't even go to the BAFTAs, awards body of his home nation, who gave him the win.
That really is a great photo. Rylance <3!
Emma, i love that you accidentally typed "Felicia" -- Freudian desire to say "Bye Felicia" to Alicia Vikander?
Emma-that's true, particularly considering that Stallone was running a particularly thirsty campaign as well (and thus Oscar could have gone for a quartet).
Ah, the inevitable backlashes. I for one loved Room and Larson in it, and I thought she was an extremely deserving winner. I found the film itself incredibly moving and gripping, and it held up very well on a second viewing for me. I may have gone for Blanchett as my #1 pick, but she had JUST won. I'm hoping Larson takes on some interesting and challenging roles in the future--I was a bit underwhelmed by her upcoming projects when I last looked. As for her competitors--I thought Brooklyn was moderately pleasant and completely unmemorable. Ronan was good, but if she had won that would have been one of my least favorite Best Actress wins in eons. Lawrence would have been my last choice. And as much as I liked Rampling, I'd still have given the edge to Larson.
I like Leo and hope to see him back onscreen in something lighter. A change of pace would be nice. And Vikander is such a promising talent--it's unfortunate that so many seem "over" her so quickly. There seems to be a lot of dislike for her on this site.
Wow, I had no idea Ezra Edelman was directing that Richard Jewell movie. That is exciting news.
Eastwood is attached to direct according to IMDB.
@Suzanne
Scorsese recently said Devil in the White City is in script phase, so maybe it's still happening? http://www.torontosun.com/2016/12/19/martin-scorsese-teases-next-film-with-leonardo-dicaprio
Alicia Vikander's win was a shining example of category fraud. No one could seriously refute that she wasn't the lead in that mediocre film. So I guess I'll hold that against her for a while, still!
/3rtfull -Suzanne is right. IMDb just hasn't updated. Edelman was announced in November.
Joe -- i love Brie and Alicia both. Tremendous actors. Alicia won for the wrong film and in the wrong category (sigh).
I was fine with all four of these winners, even though none of them were my top picks in their categories. I have a straight-girl-crush on both Brie and Alicia, so that probably figures into it somewhat. :) But I also think they're both extremely talented, and Brie in particular seems like a lovely person.
Agree that Alicia should've won for Ex Machina (though still not sure whether that would be a truly supporting role).
What a great photo. ABC could use it as an ad campaign exactly as is. "Let's go to the Oscars!"
Love Brie Larson, but her domination in Best Actress last year really baffled me. She was very good in Room but that film belonged to Jacob Tremblay in my opinion. I loved loved loved Rampling's and Ronan's performances last year. That last shot of Rampling's face in 45 Years - oh my.
Michael R -- to be honest most years baffle me in terms of steamrolling performances. There are usually at least 2 of them, sometimes 3. And it's always like "but this person was also awesome!" the only time it mmakes any sense to me is when someone is just TOWERING like say Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine. Where you're like 'okay, performances of the year of any kind' but those are few and far between.
Alicia is phenomenal in Ex Machina and is also pretty fantastic in A Royal Affair.
I'm fine if an actor is bland (i.e. Bourne and Uncle) in between great performances or if they are great in between bland performances.
Cate Blanchett in Blue Jasmine
Mo'Nique in Precious
Other than that, I generally don't agree with steamrolling. But sometimes I really like the person/performance, so I don't mind (like Patricia Arquette in Boyhood...still can't believe she has an Oscar now).
Teleprompter for Rylance: 'And the Oscar for Category Fraud goes to...'
Brie Larson will be back sooner than that -- she's in Kong: Skull Island on March 10