Smackdown '98: Kathy, Brenda, Dame Judi, Rachel, and Lynn
Monday, July 26, 2021 at 8:09PM Welcome back to the Supporting Actress Smackdown. Each month we pick an Oscar vintage to explore through the lens of actressing at the edges. This episode takes us back to 1998.
THE NOMINEES A politically savvy lesbian, a bawdy working-class mother, a theater-loving Queen, a failed musician / devoted sister, and a homophobic immigrant housekeeper in Hollywood walk into the Dorothy Chandler Pavilion...
For the 1998 film year, the Academy invited one new actress (Rachel Griffiths) to their Supporting club while offering a second nomination to four respected women of a certain age (Dame Judi Dench, Brenda Blethyn, Lynn Redgraves) only one of whom (Kathy Bates) had already won.
THE PANELISTS Here to talk about these performances and films are (in alpha order) DJ Rob Champion, Writer/Director Leslye Headland, Journalist and playwright Jenelle Riley, Actor/writer Mitch Silpa, Illustrator Dashiell Silva and, as ever, your host Nathaniel R. Let's begin...
SUPPORTING ACTRESS SMACKDOWN + PODCAST
The companion podcast can be downloaded at the bottom of this article or by visiting the iTunes page...
KATHY BATES as "Libby Holden" in Primary Colors
Synopsis: An idealistic lesbian activist goes back to work for a presidential campaign but ends up disillusioned and betrayed again by political realities.
Stats: 50 yrs old, 30th film, tenth billed with an "and". Second nomination (of an eventual four). 24 minutes of screen time (or 17% of the running time)
DJ Rob Champion: My favorite movie of the bunch. Years ago I thought the film was too cartoony for the world of politics, but over the last five years... come on. Bates is good, but it's a typical "Mouthy Broad" role that she and several others contemporaries can sleep walk through. ♥♥♥♥
Leslye Headland: Fun but arrives a little too late; tasked with giving an 11th hour emotional thruline to this political-satire-historical-fiction oddity. ♥♥♥♥
Jenelle Riley: Love Kathy Bates and she is the MVP of Primary Colors but at the end of the day, it's still Primary Colors and not a lot of room for nuance. Which leads to a bit of a conundrum: she's so good that when she's not in the scene, you really notice her absence and the film drags. ♥♥♥
Mitch Silpa: Kathy Bates does a good job despite some really on-the-nose dialogue and lesbian jokes that don't work. Though it's not really her fault, given the film's lack of focus, the moral dilemma she has to show feels forced. ♥♥♥
Dashiell Silva: There was, at the time, a wave of optimistic Clinton-era films and tv shows about the US Presidency (The American President, The West Wing, Dave). Primary Colors isn’t one of the better ones, its overall tone and message is confused. When Kathy suddenly turns up dressed like The Man With No Name, it’s like I’ve started watching a different, much better film and I want to keep watching that one instead. Bates manages to add energy to the early scenes she’s in and fully carries all the emotional weight in the latter scenes which are all about the compromises that have to be made when idealism is confronted with realism. ♥♥♥♥
Nathaniel R: Many an Oscar nod has been given to performers who kind of "wake up" a dull film with their arrival --that isn't exactly the case here. Primary Colors has plenty of energy but it's of the chaotic and unfocused variety. Bates charges into her first couple of scenes with a funny improbable fusion of 'let's go' impatience and 'am I really doing this again?' reluctance. I don't know how she sold such broad lines as "I am a gay lesbian woman" but she did. Sometimes when you want a role to be larger it's merely because you like what the actor is doing. In this case, the movie absolutely needed more of her for what it was trying to accomplish. Why use her so sparingly when you're asking her to deliver the overall thematic arc of the film? ♥♥♥♥
Reader Write-Ins: "Gloriously embodies her film’s biting humor, mad energy, barely-concealed sadness, and earnest consideration of morality and character. Best of her four genre-spanning Oscar nominations." - Nick (Reader average: ♥♥♥¾)
Actress earns 25¾ ❤s
BRENDA BLETHYN as "Marie Hoff" in Little Voice
Synopsis: A blowsy middle-aged mother romantically pursues the talent agent who wants to sign her mousy daughter whom she doesn't remotely understand.
Stats: 53 yrs old, 9th film, 1st billed. Second (and final) nomination. 39 minutes of screentime (or 40% of the running time)
DJ Rob Champion: This movie wasn't my jam. I know Brenda's point was to be annoying and overbearing. But if you're not invested in the overall film, it's not a good time. I like some of her vulnerable work towards the end, just not enough to make me care at that point. ♥♥
Leslye Headland: A broader comedic take on her stellar earth-shattering 1996 Secrets & Lies performance but it’s wasted in a movie that hates her character. ♥♥
Jenelle Riley: Ouch. Blethyn is a wildly talented actor but this entire film is a misfire. I can't blame her for not doing more with such a one-dimensional role but the entire performance goes to an 11 in a movie that's at a constant 10. ♥
Mitch Silpa: I thought I loved Brenda Blethyn but after Little Voice, I DON'T KNOW IF I DO. The director isn't helping her but... the mugging! I don't mind that the character is unlikeable but Blethyn finds no layers. Why is Marie Hoff this way? She never comes across as an actual person ♥
Dashiell Silva: Definitely the weakest performance of the lineup. It’s not Brenda’s fault really, it’s that the film and its screenplay are kind of a mess. The problem with this performance is that it’s really three distinct performances in one and I’m unsure which one it’s supposed to be. Is she a vain and bawdy Scarborough single mum? Is she a villainous and exploitative Mama Rose? Is she a sad and lonely middle-aged widow being taken for a ride by Michael Caine? I’d be happy with any one of these on its own but in a single film, I was getting whiplash from these jarring tonal changes. ♥♥
Nathaniel R: I was baffled by this nomination in 1998 and time has not been kind to it. You might generously call it "risky" but it's closer to disastrously miscalculated. Blethyn goes so big in her very first scene (which is of little narrative importance, so conserve, Brenda..., conserve) that there's nowhere to go thereafter when the movie actually needs her to bring fireworks. Without any modulation and with a lot of screentime the character becomes ever more grating and desperate. A fatal mistake since the movie is already mean-spirited in how it asks you to laugh at her. Blethyn's gestures are so broad and her line readings so shouty that one imagines she's imagining she's in an experimental stage production wherein the entire audience is curiously seated in the back row of the balcony. ♥
Reader Write-Ins: "Director: give me full Coronation Street! Blethyn: With pleasure!" - Greg H. (Reader average: ♥♥)
Actress earns 11 ❤s
JUDI DENCH as "Queen Elizabeth" in Shakespeare in Love
Synopsis: A bored queen and theater fan becomes curious about the triangle of a pompous Lord, his "plucked" bride to be, and the playwright William Shakespeare.
Stats: 64 yrs old, 18th film, sixth billed with an "and". Second nomination (of an eventual seven). 6 minutes of screen time (or 5% of the running time).
DJ Rob Champion: I like the movie overall. The film gets a bad rap for being a "Feminine" that beat the "Masculine" champ Saving Private Ryan. But, it's the best of the "Miramax For Your Aunt" movies. I'd normally not like a role so short being nominated and winning but she completely adds to the enjoyment level of the film. ♥♥♥♥
Leslye Headland: A stunt cameo that delivers a megavolt shock of gravitas to what is essentially a rom-com for theater nerds ♥♥♥♥♥
Jenelle Riley: Whaddya know, the right person won! Some may say the role is too small (almost like it's a "supporting" role!) or this was a make-good for losing for Mrs. Brown, but that's just crazy talk. In her limited screen time, Dench is a powerhouse and does more to bring life to Queen Elizabeth than some actresses have done in leading roles. ♥♥♥♥
Mitch Silpa: I was cynical about rewatching this but she's so honest and funny. The connection she gives to lines like "I know something of a woman in a man's profession" is great, too. When she appears you forget (in the best way) that there are any other characters. ♥♥♥♥♥
Dashiell Silva: It’s a tough performance to gauge because it’s so very short. (Second shortest winning performance in the category!). Queen Elizabeth I is a real challenge to perform with a lot of humanity (especially this late in her reign, when the facade is so strong and the cult of personality around her so fervent). Judi does manage to get a surprisingly large amount out of her very limited screen time, demonstrating Elizabeth’s wit and insight into people wonderfully. ♥♥♥♥
Nathaniel R: I hadn't seen Shakespeare in Love in a very long time but it hasn't aged a day. It's still fresh, vibrant and funny. One of its not-so secret weapons, deployed in exactly the right dose, is Dame Judi's Queen Elizabeth. While much has been made of her limited screen-time, the whole movie stops to focus on her whenever she arrives, which combined with a great performance, makes the role feel huge. Dench's most impressive feat is the juggling of so many emotional beats during constant genuflection from all scene-partners: self-regard, annoyance, impatience, wit, gamesmanship, curiousity. She does all of these character acrobatics while completely immobile from the neck up given the collars, costumes and her royal demenour; every room is her throne room... Oscar votes had no choice but to become her subjects. ♥♥♥♥♥
Reader Write-Ins: "Dench can do regal in her sleep but she changes up her approach. She plays a woman who, thanks to her power and privilege (and age) no longer has any f***s to give. She has crafted a fully formed comedic queen" - Tom (Reader average: ♥♥♥½)
Actress earns 30½ ❤s
RACHEL GRIFFITHS as "Hilary Du Pré" in Hilary & Jackie
Synopsis: A once promising flautist chooses an ordinary domestic life while her famous troubled cellist sister keeps crashing into her peaceful existence.
Stats: 30 yrs old, 12th film, second billed. First (and only) nomination. 44 minutes of screentime (or 36% of the running time.)
DJ Rob Champion: This movie is just a mutated Oscar clip. I didn't hate it. But, does play into the "Raquel, Raquelness" of 90s Award Winners. The Hilary character doesn't live up to setups paved for her. I was disappointed. ♥♥♥
Leslye Headland: More of a co-lead than a supporting turn but the less flashy role sends her Oscar campaign to this category. While she does shine here, Griffiths will go on to bigger and better things. ♥♥♥
Jenelle Riley: Griffiths is completely capable in the suffering sister role. I can see why the movie was an indie hit at the time - suffering prodigies were very en vogue - but it now appears as a bit of a curiosity in how completely unremarkable it is. ♥♥
Mitch Silpa: The points of view story structure works. Rachel Griffiths is so connected that, without mugging, every feeling and thought registers. The scene where Rachel is blowing into the flute and unable to get enough breath? The scene and her terror has stayed with me since I first saw the movie in 1998. I've had auditions like that! ♥♥♥♥
Dashiell Silva: First off, this is category fraud. Hilary du Pré definitely plays a supporting role in the story of her sister Jackie’s life but she’s one of the two titular roles in the film and she’s fully the protagonist of the first half of it. I think this is the problem with the role. Rachel is always great but the role isn’t large enough to be a lead in the way Emily Watson’s Jackie is. (Emily gets to do so much: mental instability, cloying emotional neediness, cello performances with supporting orchestra, shrieking naked in the woods, bewildering accent work, screwing his sister’s husband, debilitating MS attacks. While Rachel… works on a farm in the Home Counties). Rachel’s role also isn’t colourful enough to be a fun, weird supporting role in the way that Judi Dench or Kathy Bates roles are in this lineup. ♥♥♥
Nathaniel R: A leading role so it doesn't belong here. But, that frequent caveat aside, it's always nice to see the Academy spring for more reactive performances since they generally prefer extroverted acting. But quiet performances can be just as crucial to a film as the louder ones (in this case, Emily Watson's Jackie). Griffiths handles the tongue-biting repression of the domestic sister quite well and she's working smartly to show us Hilary's self-erasing devotion to Jackie, but I was left wanting a lot more from both the character and her. It remains odd that this was the awards role given that her best work (Six Feet Under, Muriel's Wedding) came in the, yes, showier and more extroverted roles where she left lasting impressions. ♥♥♥
Reader Write-Ins: "Her best work is silent, all in the eyes and the way she carries herself. Lacks a bit of a point of view in the final scenes, but she really broke my heart." - George (Reader average: ♥♥♥¼)
Actress earns 21 ❤s
LYNN REDGRAVE as "Hanna" in Gods and Monsters
Synopsis: The longtime housekeeper of a famous film director worries about him obsessively after a stroke, especially when it comes to handsome men visiting him.
Stats: 55 yrs old, 19th film, third billed. Second and final nomination. 14 minutes of screentime (or 13% of the running time.)
DJ Rob Champion: Easily the best film in the pact. But I was so astonished by Ian, that I forgot the other actors were there. Lynn is quite good at what she's given but she's not given that much to stick out. So not Oscar-worthy for me. ♥♥♥
Leslye Headland: There aren’t many actors who could navigate the bizarre chemistry of Brendan Fraser and Ian McKellen. A serviceable and well-executed performance. ♥♥♥
Jenelle Riley: Were it not for Dench, Redgrave probably would have walked away with the Oscar for Gods and Monsters, a film that not only holds up but has only gotten better with age. While her loyal housekeeper is the heart of the film, she is is also strident, strict, and uncompromising. Redgrave is utterly flawless in every scene. ♥♥♥♥
Mitch Silpa: For me she was a revelation. She becomes a different soul. She manages to play the homophobia and judgemental qualities as naivete and you end up loving her innocence and loyalty. She found the exact right tone for this movie, and is especially strong in her scenes with Brendan Fraser. I wanted her to win. ♥♥♥♥♥
Dashiell Silva: Of the lineup here, this is the performance that is most conventionally fully realised. Lynn is introduced first as a lightly comedic, uptight German housekeeper. She’s ever present in the movie but manages to keep slowly accumulating emotional weight in her small scenes even though it’s not her film at all. It really pays off for her. Her final scene is emotionally devastating. It’s a tough call for me between her and Judi but they’re my top two. (I guess I think Lynn should have won but I’m not mad at Judi given the unstoppable momentum that Shakespeare in Love had that year.) ♥♥♥♥♥
Nathaniel R: I remember thinking this turn was not much more accomplished than a one note SNL character at the time. Years later I realize I was being quite ungenerous though I still think the nomination errs in the other direction. I never bought the accent but she fully commits to her choices and that's admirable. She's funny and especially effective in the embarrassed homophobic dancing she does around her employer and his would-be conquests. ♥♥♥
Reader Write-Ins: "Redgrave's turn as James Whale's cantankerous German housekeeper could have been a real caricature. But Redgrave really digs into this woman's being and I believed her every minute" - Rob (Reader average: ♥♥♥)
Actress earns 26 ❤s
RESULT: Dame Judi Dench won the Oscar which many considered a make-up Oscar for her loss the year before for Her Majesty Mrs. Brown. At the Smackdown, with no such guilt or do-over feeling, she still handily triumphs. The true competition turns out to be for the runner-up position. Lynn Redgrave's tetchy housekeeper ekes out the win by just a 1/4th of a heart though Kathy Bates actually takes first place in the reader write-in votes by the same margin over Dench! Exciting race this time.
THE FULL PODCAST CONVERSATION
Download at the bottom of this post 👇 or listen on Spotify to hear the in-depth discussion with our marvelous guests. [All Previous Smackdowns]
UP NEXT: 1986 is coming in late August so queue up Children of a Lesser God, The Color of Money, Crimes of the Heart, Hannah and Her Sisters, and A Room With a View
Reader Comments (68)
Luke: I mean, the quote was "Give me FULL Coronation Street", I'd assume meaning "go as big as the biggest moments on that show and don't stop going that big", so...read a little more carefully?
Anyone else having trouble with the podcast playing/downloading in the iPhone app?
But Volvo, she fit the role as written and the film as directed as well as anyone. I find the film less odious and monstrously bad as everybody here seems to. Like other non closed minded cinema fans here have mentioned. It's a stylised performance in a film that has a distinct tone and that will usually draw very different opinions.
Such an iconic lineup of performers that I think all outshone their roles in a year with much fuller roles overlooked. And you didn't do the role swap part at the end, on of my favorite parts of smackdown!
Bates finally got that follow-up Oscar nod after years of solid performances throughout the 90s after her lead actress win and, like many in the early years of the SAG award, likely won because the awards weren't around when she won her Oscar. Being the only American in the lineup (at the identical SAGs and Oscars) likely helped her narrative too. She also plays a sympathetic character in a very cynical movie, helping her performances stand out in a highly publicized movie.
Blethyn was part of the "class of '96" (with Norton, Thornton, Rush, and Watson) whose recency likely helped carry her into a lineup where she likely wasn't close to winning, in a movie that had been heavily hyped for costars Horrocks and Caine more than for her. Speaking of Caine, I could easily see Julie Walters in this part. Horrocks would have been a welcome surprise in Best Actress and the ensemble is solid too (both earning well deserved SAG nods), but Blethyn have given far better supporting (and even a few lead) performances in the years since that aren't as loud, which, let's face it, gets in over subtleties like Joan Allen offered.
Dench was magnificent in a limited (not cameo!) role, but this will always be an "I'm glad she has an Oscar, but why for this role?" part. This was very much a combo of "we're sorry we didn't give it to you last time" and "you're in a Best Picture contender" needed to "check the box," in addition to a solid performance. I'll still root for Dench to be recognized for a performance where she can actually show more of what she can do, but it may be "too late, too late."
Griffiths was a revelation and a surprise SAG and Oscar inclusion. I'm sorry it was to to exclusion of Allen and Kudrow, but I am glad that Griffiths is an Oscar-nominated actress and that viewers didn't just stop at recognition for Watson for this movie. She would have been a wonderful nominee for Muriel's Wedding when she was even more unknown and has given really great performances in Aussie cinema, but U.S. audiences now know her best for her dynamic TV work, in addition to being wasted in thankless studio pics, so I'm glad she ultimately had her moment here, since it doesn't seem likely to happen again.
And the late great Redgrave was and remains my personal pick from this lineup. Always the "fun" sister to the more serious Vanessa, Lynn also had a recent moment in Shine that she built from after, as pointed out on the podcast, toiling away on TV sitcoms, starting with her Globe and Emmy nominated role on House Calls, from which she was fired after she aske to nurse her daughter on set (she was "replaced" by Sharon Gless, who cited this as a reason for which was originally unavailable for and then why she didn't want to step into Cagney & Lacey). Gods and Monsters gave her a chance to, at least once, step away from that offbeat British thing she did so well, and she really knocked it out of the park. Even news of her marriage breaking up during awards season wasn't enough to engender enough personal sympathy to carry her over the finish line. Even though she is still the only person to get all EGOT nominations without winning any of them, she left behind a strong legacy of performances that I hope many will continue to appreciate.
NathanielB -- i was hoping people wouldn't notice. LOL. I had to cut for time. Maybe i'll put it up on a separate post.
Dr G -- i've been alerted to the problem so i'm working on it. Not sure what's wrong. But in the meantime you can listen to it at the bottom of the post if needs be.
Glorious film year with Oscar dropping the ball a bit in this category, given the inclusion of Blethyn (quite bad) and Griffiths (co-lead). Though I'd choose Bates over Dench, I love the panelists' love for the latter's performance and the film itself, both of which have been unfairly maligned over the years. My dream line-up would've been:
Joan Allen, PLEASANTVILLE ***
Kathy Bates, PRIMARY COLORS
Patricia Clarkson, HIGH ART
Toni Collette, VELVET GOLDMINE
Judi Dench, SHAKESPEARE IN LOVE
I don't sit in a movie with a stopwatch and time the performances. I rely on my own impression of the "impact" and if a performance hits a certain tipping point, I'll consider it Oscar-worthy. Two examples of performances that just missed were Kate Winslet in Iris and Marlon Brando in A Dry White Season. I was very pressed but their roles were maybe one scene short or needed another minute of screen time. I admit it's subjective and inexact, because a couple of years ago I was all in for Laura Kinney in Nocturnal Animals. She only had one scene and around 5 minutes of screen time, but she totally knocked me out. I felt she would have completely deserved the Oscar. So there.
@Paranoid Android - I love that Kudrow makes your list. That movie overall is a little uneven (loved it at the time but watched a couple years ago and it’s easy to see the flaws). But her performance is so fantastic and was an early sign that she had so much more to give us after “Friends”!
Queen Dench slayed! So glad she won the Smackdown! I was expecting this crowd to pick Bates, TBH. Not really a fan of Bates's supporting nominations. Exciting roster! Even Brenda Blethyn had her moments lol.
Rachel Griffith does NOT appear in 64% of her movie.
The structure tricks us to see her as lead but this movie belongs to Jackie Du Pré.
EVERYONE -- the podcast is being wonky on apple so try SPOTIFY if you dont listen to it here. the link is in the post now.
numbers -- we mentioned 36% in the text but it's not a trick that she's a lead. She's one of two titular characters. She has half the movie and Emily has the other half and they both appear in each other's halves... i think rather, that its the characters passive nature that "tricks" people into thinking it's supporting. ;)
Dorian -- tbh i was expecting the panel to pick Bates too but they surprised me with Dench/Redgrave. I dont get the Redgrave love really but very pleased Dench won.
I've always felt this was a slightly underwhelming line-up save Griffiths. Dench stole the show in her film but that wasn't too hard. Bates could have done that performance in her sleep, and Blethyn and Redgrave were too broad. I remember that award season vividly and Redgrave campaigned hard, which paid off to an extent with her Globe win. In my view she looked nervous and I think she doesn't hide too well her understandable disappointment when Dench's name is announced.
My nominees:
Jane Adams
Rachel Griffiths
Lisa Kudrow
Laura Linney
Sharon Stone
I hate when people who know nothing about film or acting talk about it. Usually when anyone says someone can sleepwalk through a role, then they fall in that to that category. Unfortunately, the lens thru which you view these things is cloudy. Looking for the wrong things.
Anyway, not because Bates is the easy choice, but because that's such a dumb, "I don't know much but I want to and I watch arthouse films and plenty of shitty shit that caters to my phony takes"...sorry, that was longwinded. But it's the truth.
Bates is as good as this category can get. Great film as well, snarky and intelligent. Super intelligent, and really has a feel for the ins and outs.
Happy to see Mitch Silpa here. I was an undergraduate at UCLA while he was a grad student. We auditioned for the same one-act play at one point, and I got to see him in the campus production of "Les Liaisons Dangeruses." He was terrific. Mitch, I don't know if you'll read this, but I'm glad that you participated in a Smackdown!
Grimmer news: This supporting actress roster really scrapes the barrel. By process of elimination, I'd pick Rachel Griffiths, but I'm not bowled over by anybody here, and, save for Patricia Clarkson, I'm hard-pressed even to find alternatives. Tom Q's post encapsulated my feelings perfectly.
Kathy Bates is entertaining, but her character is so strong that I didn't believe what happened to her at the end of the film.
Brenda Blethyn is . . . well, the performance is just . . . God, I can't . . .
Judi Dench: not enough here for a nomination or a win.
Rachel Griffiths: a fine, unshowy performance, but not really memorable (But I loved her work in "Six Feet Under," which was roughly around the same time period.)
Lynn Redgrave's cartoonish performance doesn't really work. I remember sitting through "Gods and Monsters," watching the comedic moments (from everyone) fall flat. (Exception: a shot of Redgrave deftly smacking eggs in a bowl and throwing away the shells while preparing breakfast). I could feel the audience sinking into disappointment in the first half and then into apathy in the second half.
But I find it's always fun discussing and reading about the nominated performances, no matter what the quality. On to 1986!
This was the nominee pool when Joan Allen, Lisa Kudrow, and Joan Allen were RIGHT there, with buzz too...
I'm glad Judi Dench won, though. Reliving this makes her Oscar win feel more satisfying than everyone has made it seem over the years.
^ Oops, meant Joan Allen, Lisa Kudrow, and Patricia Clarkson. hehe.
Redemption for Judi Dench! Love it! So sick of the "it was only a cameo!" whining. She did that shit and fully earned her Oscar win. It doesn't help matters that the Weinstein stench has amplified an already contentious battle between Shakespeare in Love and the Saving Private Ryan film bros. I think the right film won Best Picture, and the right actress won supporting actress. We won't discuss lead actor or lead actress that year...