Almost There: Meg Ryan in "When Harry Met Sally..."
Thursday, December 31, 2020 at 7:30PM 
Last week, we examined a Christmas movie performance that came close to Oscar glory to celebrate the holidays. Now that we're at the end of one year and the beginning of the next, it seems appropriate to choose a New Year's Eve film. When it came time to pick such a picture, my mind immediately went to Rob Reiner's 1989 smash When Harry Met Sally…, a perfect rom-com whose Nora Ephron-penned screenplay earned a much-deserved Academy Award nomination. Our focus shall be on the Sally of the title, Meg Ryan giving a comedienne's masterclass…
When Harry Met Sally… starts in 1977 when the protagonists are just out of college in Chicago and are headed to New York, sharing a ride to the Big Apple that's full of bickering. Their youthful incompatibility is clear from minute one as Sally enters the movie in a feat of intrusive energy, driving into the scene just as Harry is making out with his girlfriend. With a helmet of 70s curls and blue eyeshadow, she's a vision of girlish irritation, greeting the lovebirds with an insincere smile. Even the cynicism of this expression manages to be funny in Ryan's hands, charming too.
During the long car ride, her chemistry with Crystal is impossible to comprehend, it's so unfathomably brilliant. The relationship between the characters may start as antagonistic, but the way they chat and argue speaks of a sublime complement of personalities. His lackadaisical humor as a shield to hide hurt and her nervous chirpiness work perfectly with the other. One quickly realizes that whether or not this dynamic turns into romance, we'll be happy to spend hours hanging out with them. Even when just acquaintances, they're irresistible. A few years later, that's still true when they meet at the airport, bickering some more.
We can find great precision in how Ryan shows Sally's aging, from the lessening chirpiness of speech patterns to the growing comfort in body language. A woman who's learning to be at ease with herself as the years go by, she goes from an overcompensating college graduate to a responsible adult. The most flagrant alteration is Sally's relationship with sex and shame. In the prologue, she's embarrassed about implying the word in public. In New York, a decade after, she has no qualms about faking an explosive orgasm and seems to enjoy the attention she's getting. That scene should have been her Oscar clip if there was any justice in the world.
Notice too, how, in 1977, Ryan's Sally insists she's a happy person with the sort of stubborn resoluteness of someone telling a lie to themselves. Later, when she insists on this again, the forcefulness is gone, but the words ring more authentic. Her relationship with these realities of joy has evolved, though her attitude towards life remains steadfast. Aging's not only a matter of change. Some things, such as Sally's optimism, are constant throughout her many temporal incarnations, shining in different colors but keeping the same light.
When Harry and Sally tell each other about their plights in the late 80s, Ryan delivers one of her most delicate feats of characterization. Sally's sad about her broken love affair with another man but also lost in bittersweet remembrance. There's a wistfulness to her words, a ghost of lost glee that's still treasured by the wounded heart. Still, she's not lying when she's explaining the logic of the breakup. Neither is she trying to convince herself of a desperate untruth. Nothing makes her feel more wonderfully mature than such psychological peace.
Not that she's immune to negative emotion or the overwhelming violence of unhappiness. She does try to live through loss and romantic melancholia, not letting its acid kiss burn her. However, even this romcom heroine has her limits. When the floodgates of pain open up, they do so spectacularly with tears, snot, shouted whining. Their first New Year's Eve dance is a precious example of drama barging its way into the frothy romance. Then, as they dance, both Harry and Sally start to feel the inkling of romance. Ryan plays it as if Sally is scared, terrified of her heart, of how happy Harry makes her. She's terrified of the risk, of losing the relationship, the friendship, in pursuit of romantic intimacy.
Another example of Ryan's canny telegraphing of her character's arc is her exasperation with Harry. Earlier in the movie, it's a feeling tainted with irritation, revulsion. As the story continues, it becomes shaded with fondness, a rueful manifestation of their chemistry, both as friends and romantic partners. Whether arguing with abrasive feeling or throwing zingers at each other in playful tones, one can't help but laugh with them. There's such great comedic timing to every one of her reactions, gestures, and line readings that it's both comedy gold and a masterclass in effortless acting.
She's so effortlessly charismatic, in fact, that one can take Ryan's work for granted. Make no mistakes, this is an unimprovable performance, a feat of rom-com acting that puts most others to shame. Part of it is that Ryan doesn't ever play Sally as a type, never reducing her to some cartoonish archetype. The actress is helped by the script and gentle direction, of course. When Harry Met Sally… is, after all, an adult romance that doesn't see love as a magic phenomenon but has a complex dynamic that grows between people and needs work to remain healthy, alive, vital.
This touch of realism demands a lot of the actors, but it also gives them opportunities to explore the plasticity of their talent. It doesn't make the romance any less lovely either, quite the contrary. The feeling that we're watching people instead of movie mechanisms makes it all the more beautiful. In the end, it's not that men and women can't be friends but that they need to be friends for a romantic relationship to work. Thankfully, since this is a jolly romcom, Harry and Sally do find a way to make it work. They conclude the movie as a couple happily united after a New Year's Eve kiss that'll forever have a place of pride in the history of cinematic romance.
Oscar-wise, SAG and the BFCA were still years away from giving out Best Actress prizes so one can't count on them to define who was in the awards conversation. However, the Globes were already there and Meg Ryan did score a nomination. She also won the American Comedy Award, but AMPAS ignored her in favor of Isabelle Adjani in Camille Claudel, Pauline Collins in Shirley Valentine, Jessica Lange in Music Box, Michelle Pfeiffer in The Fabulous Baker Boys, and, the victor, Jessica Tandy in Driving Miss Daisy. By my account, Ryan is miles better than the majority of the nominees and would have made quite the worthy winner too.
When Harry Met Sally... is available to stream on HBO Max. You can also rent it from most services.
Reader Comments (32)
Crazy how a series of well-selected photo stills can take me through an entire movie.
This film, along with When a Man Loves a Woman and Courage Under Fire, were probably Meg Ryan's best shots at getting noticed by the Academy. It's weird that none of them worked. You can't really point a finger at snobbery toward commercially popular actresses, particularly when Julia Roberts scored her first two nominations in roughly the same time period.
Meg Ryan gave the best performance of her career in this movie, but maybe I prefer other comic performances : Winona Ryder (Heathers) or Kathleen Turner (The war of Roses)
It's strange but I agree with the Academy, the nominees and the winner were right choices.
I got paid once to write a film encyclopedia entry on Ryan when I was in school. Every time I'd bring it up, though, people would roll their eyes. But she's always been very good. In her comedies, she often comes close to a Clara Bow spriteliness, but with a great ability to levin it with perfectly calibrated cynicism. Her dramatic work in CITY OF ANGLES is breathtaking. There's a scene where, after she's lost a patient on the operating table (she's a doctor), she sits in a stairwell (at least that's how I remember it) and cries. It's utterly masterful. I think the movie itself was just too saccharine to be considered for awards, but her performance was absolutely awards worthy.
Ryan could be included in the not so coveted club of the Stars not beloved by the Academy even if she had anything to be appreciated, being charming, talented and popular. I agree that she’s at her best here but maybe Best Actress was quite crowded in 1989, her drama vehicle When a man loves a woman could have been a right occasion but 1994 was a year quite strange for Best Actress and probable the reception was not enough spectacular to grant Ryan a much due nom
I feel every word. This is a performance for the ages.
I don't think she was even 6th.
MacDowell was probably 6th.
I think this is a fantastic selection,Ryan proves here that comedy done just perfectly caan be as potent as the greatest emoting or suffering of a Drama.
love the performance but i doubt the deli scene would have been her oscar clip [too racy for TV in 1990]; probably her complicated order for apple pie "i don't want the ice cream on top, i want it on the side, and i'd like strawberry instead of vanilla if you have it. if not, then no ice cream, just whipped cream but only if it's real; if it's out of a can, then nothing" or, more likely, the "and i'm going to be FORTY" scene
Thought she was great in Hurlyburly too
Not every performance is meant for Oscar glory, but I wish this one had been. This is a performance I think about constantly because it’s just brilliant. In a just world this movie would have been nominated for more than just screenplay because in many ways it’s a perfect film.
Meg Ryan absolutely deserved a nomination for her work in this film, every reaction shot is just perfect. What you said about the charisma and nuance of the performance is so true: Sally is such a fully, wonderfully human character. I guess she'll just have to settle for being one of the biggest stars of her day.
On another note, every time I watch this film I'm struck by just how much she and Nicole Kidman favored each other back then. Funny that Meg ended up taking Nicole's place in "In the Cut" (another sorely underrated film/performance).
Meg Ryan is absolutely magical in this. Haven't checked, but I bet she's better here than at least 50% of best actress nominees that decade.
I rewatched this last week! And I swear the whole time I just kept thinking, “Man, Meg Ryan just does it ALL in this movie.” I’m not even close to a diehard fan of hers, but I really bow down to this performance.
Of the Best Actress nominees for that year, I've only seen Pfeiffer (in a performance I'd easily give her an Oscar for), but I seriously doubt every one of those performances is better than Ryan in WHMS.
@ thefiljunkie
Really? All I see is Alicia Silverstone's older doppelgänger.
If the Academy can nominate Julia Roberts for Pretty Woman they SURELY could have nominated Meg Ryan for this. I honestly don’t get how she missed.
Best Actress was not crowded in 1989! Pauline Collins got nominated for Shirley Valentine for goodness sakes!!
Collins inclusion actually surprised me but she got the Bafta and she was Golden Globe nominated, that means she had enough support, besides her role lovable and who watched the film loved her...but, yep, if Meg or Andie had some chances Collins was on their arrivals
The internet assuming that WHMS was the runner-up for everything in 89 makes me laugh (and old). It's a classic today but, back in the day, it was just a well-written comedy.
Shirley Valentine was a big thing. It had productions everyhwere and it was seen as super feminist.
1989 was a weird year. Ryan was also nominated for Chicago Film Critics Award and surely in contention as seen in newspaper articles from the period, but it was also her first commercial and critical success - in a comedy. Surely it was too lightweight and the AMPAS probably thought she hadn't "paid her dues". Roberts in 1990 at least already had an Oscar nod under helt belt and in retrospect a greater "star is born"-moment. In 1989, Ryan also had to share the spotlight with several other acclaimed "next decade's superstar"-contenders: MacDowell in Sex, Lies and Videotape, Pfeiffer in Fabulous Baker Boys and to some degree Barkin in Sea of Love.
Following 1989, she probably came closest for an Oscar nod in 1993 (Sleepless in Seattle) and in 1994 (When a Man Loves a Woman). But in 1994 I think she failed to gain more traction because of I.Q. flopping. I remember reading in, was it an EW-article for their Autumn Preview, that I.Q. would be her Oscar bait-role.
Courage Under Fire was an Oscar-bait role but her momentum didn't sustain past summer. The Doors and Restoration were also prestige films, but if I do recall correctly she wasn't particularly singled out in them. You've Got Mail was at its best a long-shot with little bit of dark horse potential (but Paltrow and Diaz were more acclaimed and also starring in comedies).
Charm, charisma, and comedy are always undervalued by the Academy. They (and viewers) tend to think the actors aren't really doing anything, a la Cary Grant (and Hugh Grant for that matter).
At the time, I thought Carrie Fisher had a better shot at a Best Supporting Actress nom. It was probably her biggest role/hit post Star Wars.
She would have been my winner in 1989 and has easily sustained more cultural cache than any of the nominees (due respect to Pfeiffer and Tandy, both of whose performances I like a lot).
She was miscast in Courage Under Fire, though. I didn't believe her as that character at all.
I think comedies and those who make them and star in them generally fall into the category of - Underappreciated.
I love Meg Ryan's performance and she is adorable and perfect in the part.
But they nominated Nora Ephron for her perfect screenplay, but then gave the Oscar to Tom Shulman for "Dead Poets Society". (seriously???)
For every "Moonstruck" where they get it right and reward Cher, there are way more films like "Clueless", "Mean Girls", "Notting Hill", "Sleepless in Seattle", "Romancing the Stone", etc...
Comedies don't get the glory, but they do get the love, especially over time.
@Peggy Sue. I remember WHMS in the theaters and it was, as I recall, kind of a big deal. It wasn't considered an Oscar cinch, like, say BROADCAST NEWS or MOONSTRUCK, and it's middle of the summer release certainly didn't encourage people in December to consider it. But it did get that screenplay nod and 5 Globe nominations. It certainly could have happened for Ryan in the same way Julia Roberts got one for PRETTY WOMAN.
Why I have never been a fan of Meg Ryan... it has always bugged me down how she wasn't even nominated for an Oscar that probably she should have won, just for the fake orgasm scene...
I think she came closer to the Oscar (a nomination) with Sleepless in Seattle. But she's great in When Harry Met Sally too. She and the script are the highlights of the film and, frankly, she deserves more than Billy Crystal. He's not Humphrey Bogart with Ingrid Bergman, James Cagney with Doris Day, Jack Nicholson with Kathleen Turner... I can accept him as a comedian, but not in a romantic comedy with Meg Ryan. Why not Tom Hanks, Alec Baldwin, actors the actress worked with in other films?
Without question deserved a nomination, as did Crystal, Fisher, Reiner and the film itself in Picture. I think the summer release was a real hurdle in keeping it all relevant by awards season. Suspect both Field and Ullmann were ahead of her in the Best Actress race.
Ullmann? Which one? For what?
Claudio - I had such a fun evening yesterday thanks to you.... I revisited one of my all-time-favourites and I actually so agree. I did somehow toke Ryans perfectly and carefully timed performance for granted. She is absolutely exquisite and picture perfect. Besides Tandys historic win & Pfeiffers magic - I can only remember that everyone loved Pauline Collins back then but I'm not sure how that performance holds up today. Also interesting to remember that Ryan was actually not that famous before Sally. And I got to say - Billy Crystal deserves his spot in Almost There was well !! I also bow down to Nora Ephron's fantastic script - so slick, pointed, wise and really really funny - it reminds me AGAIN unfortunately how rare these great collaborations & movies have become these days. Maybe the older I get the more this film actually grows on me - but it is in many ways a PERFECT MOVIE about human relationships in general - and that after 30 years !
Tandy, Ryan and Pfeiffer are amongst the best performances the category would have seen the entire decade.
Crystal is superb here, too, and Meg Ryan deserves a lot of appreciation for that. She gives him so much to work with, and so much of what he does is react to her (the "I'm gonna be 40" scene is amazing", and as was already said their chemistry is in the all-time ranks.
Late to the party here but Ryan would have easily been my winner that year but an unfathomably wide Margin. IMO it was THE best performance of the year of either gender.
Pfeiffer aside I think it’s an incredibly paltry line-up. I please guilty to worshipping at the altar of Lange (yes I know she was always uneven and quite bad often enough, but I love her) and I think she’s better in Music Box upon revisit than I remembered. But still not nom worthy. Adjani would have been by runner up behind Pfeiffer and similar to Lange the sheer impact of her personality when she’s losing it will never not thrill me. But while i love seeing someone like her on a ballot I do think by 1988 a bit of house style had set in and it’s basically watching Adjani run thru her greatest hits. She’s definitely not phoning it in and there are bits and pieces of her work I truly love but as a whole it’s not one I can get all that excited about on it’s own terms.
Collins and Tandy stink, I’m sorry. They are both talented actresses whose best work I happen to enjoy quite a bit. But even taking into account the nature of the role and the obvious oscar hook I think Tandy actually is bad, not lightweight but actually bad. It’s totally obvious how little she thinks of the treacle she’s in and all of the chemistry comes exclusively from freeman. She’s a pro and is occasionally is funny and occasionally approaches poignancy. That’s about as far as it goes with me. Could have been worse but it’s an easy role and I don’t even think she meets that low bar. I don’t want to begrudge someone getting that kind of recognition that late into a career, but passing over Adjani and especially Pfeiffer is really just egregious. And Collins’ nomination is like something out of the twilight zone. She’s charming and wry, period full stop. Did hate Sally Field or something? Was Shirley Valentine’s stage success just too tempting to pass up? Did they somehow think Collins was overdue? I wasn’t around then so I hope someone knows how she slid right into a nomination.
Dan, Ullmann got a golden globe nomination for something called The Rose Garden. I literally would not have known this movie existed (and I highly doubt I’m alone here) had she not gotten that nomination. Since her name showed up no where else I have a hard time believing she was actually close to getting an Oscar nomination. It reads like they were just trying to fill a slot at the globes. Again I wasn’t going to the movies in 1989 so maybe I’m missing something. But Ullmann was hardly awards fodder at that point in time.