There were wonderful performances from leading actresses but none that really seem to get people thrilled and talking. There's no Streep v. Davis. There's nothing arousing passionate support.
This.
We're talking in the context of awards prognostication, not in the context of quality performances.
The other 3 acting categories already have front runners and horse races. Lead actress seems to be missing any one or two performances that have people talking. "Weak year" is referring to buzz, not quality.
OK, but prestige awards movies don't always mean major bucks, and the relative lack of female-driven big bucks movies is hardly anything new. It still doesn't explain the buzz bout this being a weak year for leading women.
Not to mention it would not be surprising if Silver Linings Playbook or Zero Dark Thirty are hits, right? To be added to the bigtime girl power of Hunger Games and Twilight. Sure, less blockbuster than those movies, but hey big pulp movies like those are generally not awards fodder.
So basically, what's wrong isn't female performances but the categorization of what constitutes a "buzzworthy" one to movie pundits? Wow, I'm gonna need a moment to contain my surprise.
I think the problem is that the casts of most movies are majority male. On top of that, the movies most people want to go see are not necessarily what the film community deems of sufficient quality to vie for awards, which is not necessarily a bad thing.
As to what's buzzworthy in terms of the best of the movie season, well that's a great deal about marketing. As evidenced by the discussion of what will win by a multitude of people - myself included - who haven't seen a great many of the contenders.
That's what I trying to get across. There are a lot of amazing lead actress performances but for whatever reason the Hollywood machine hasn't latched onto one particular role this year.
That's where I'm coming from when I mention "buzz". I don't mean there was a lack of strong female characters on display this year.
Right. But not latching on to a single performance is a good thing; and it could well change by the time the guild awards get going, leading to the end of the season boredom.
David Edelstein from New York Magazine seems to have hated it (and again, heavily criticizes the source material, pointing to one of the worst lines of dialogue in the show: "I'm Javert/Do not forget my name"):
The tasteless bombardment that is Les Misérables would, under most circumstances, send audiences screaming from the theater, but the film is going to be a monster hit and award winner, and not entirely unjustly. After 30 or so of its 157 minutes, you build up a tolerance for those it’s-alive-alive-alive! close-ups and begin to admire the gumption—along with the novelty of being worked over by such a big, shameless Broadway musical without having to pay Broadway prices. The authors (there are four credited screenwriters) have pared down Victor Hugo’s great wallow of a novel to its dumb, pious moral (Christian forgiveness always wins, though you might not live to break out the Champagne), but the show has been audience-tested for decades and defiantly holds the screen, much like its French revolutionaries at the barricades. Hugo’s hero, Jean Valjean, is played by Hugh Jackman, who is shockingly emaciated in his first scenes as a prisoner—I mistook him for Ron Moody’s Fagin. Jackman is, of course, an old hand at musicals and looks great when allowed to grow his Wolverine sideburns. He can play Valjean’s unwavering goodness without being a simp. But he’d have come off better if he hadn’t been forced to sing at the tippy-top of his register—and higher. On the other hand, no transposition would have helped Russell Crowe as the lawman Javert, Valjean’s unyielding antagonist: His voice is tight and comes from the head, the sound of a foghorn ending in a wheeze. But he stands and delivers his numbers—I can’t believe I’m using this adverb—manfully, and I salute him. It can’t have been easy for an untrained singer to handle Claude-Michel Schönberg’s awful recitativo, which does not—unlike Schönberg’s near namesake, Schoenberg—have the excuse of being purposefully atonal. “And I’m Javert?/?Do not forget my name!” would have crumpled a lesser man on the spot. David Edelstein's Review
I have to say that I always hate that line too. Watching Crowe deliver it in the clip that's circulating however was the first time it ever sounded like a real line and not needless exposition.
"I am not a moron. I can deal with building the factual reality in my head when the style of the film decides against being literal. But that is what is so much the failure of Les Misérables… it wants it both ways. It wants to be profoundly intimate, suffering in extreme close-up, the singing-on-the-set choice (the endless hype about which has turned it from “choice” to “stunt), and shooting almost completely in singles and tight doubles. Edit. Edit. Edit.
But the material is HUGE and EPIC and MELODRAMATIC.
So the effect of director Tom Hooper’s is like looking at Mount Everest through the wrong side of the binoculars."
If all these reviewed are indeed true, props to the P.R team for Les Mis. After that premiere performance, they convinced a lot of people this had serious BP potential.
Maybe it is because I live in new york and go to a lot of screenings but Jennifer Lawerence and Jessica Chastain are getting phenomenal buzz. Chastain is winning awards left and right.
Of course they are in New York. Much of the rest of the country hasn't seen Zero Dark Thirty and Silver Linings Playbook is performing, at best, modestly.
This has actually been an outstanding year for women in film. Brave, Twilight, The Hunger Games, Prometheus, and Snow White and the Huntsman were massive box office successes and all had female protagonists.
But again, Best Actress is typically one of the most closely followed categories- it's one of the few that people get very passionate about. Arguably more than the other three acting categories, I think. But right now no one is especially passionate. If Jennifer Lawrence beats Chastain, or vice-versa, it's not going to ignite the blogs. As of now.
I remember this same thing happened recently to "Dreamgirls" and to "Nine," where film critics pointed out major flaws in plot and dialogue from the original source material.
It's hard for Broadway fans to realize their beloved stage show is being criticized and raked over the coals in some cases as much as the film itself, particularly when the complaints are aimed at the original stage songs, dialogue, and plot construction.
EDIT: I have to say this about "Zero Dark Thirty," the latest critics' darling. If it's anything like The Hurt Locker, I will hate it. I think that movie is the single dullest Best Picture winner in history, and that's going all the way back to the early talkies. It's redundant and lets the "importance" of the subject matter pass for good storytelling and filmmaking.
If Kathryn Bigelow strikes again with that approach, count me out, big-time.
I'm totally with you on "The Hurt Locker," bestie. I'm cautiously optimistic about "Zero Dark Thirty" because I love Jessica Chastain with every fiber of my being, but I'm really hoping she changes up her style. "The Hurt Locker" wasn't an awful movie, but it was a snooze.
Also, that David Edelstein review has been classed by RottenTomatoes as "fresh." So, you know... what?
I think Lisa Schwarzbaum is spot on and is being quite generous in giving it a”C”. Just got back from a screening at the DGA and have to say the film is pretty awful. Tom Hooper seems to have directed his actors to project their dialogue/songs to the third mezzanine of Radio City Music Hall while holding the camera twelve inches from their face.
I shouldn't pay too much attention to Lisa Schwarzbaum's review.
The only 2 things she mentions are the fact that Russel Crowe can't sing broadway style. That's true and we knew that from the beginning, that's the fault of the filmmakers.
And that Fantine looks happy when she sings about her glory days. I'm glad she does.
But if that's all you can come up with after having seen the film I wonder what she has been doing while sitting in the cinema.
That Schwartzbaum review is transparent. She seems hung up on the Awards buzz and hype, mentioning it not once but several times, and clearly it clouded her perspective watching the film. She also admits to hating the stage musical in her final paragraph. So it didn't stand a chance with her.
EDIT: I admit to chuckling over her "Captn. Crunch" comment about Crowe's wardrobe, though. Hey, that was the style back then ... for both Javert and Crunch!
Bea Arthur Nude Sells For Nearly $2 Million At Auction
Drama Desk Award Winners - MATILDA, VANYA AND SONIA, PIPPIN, VIRGINIA WOOLF & More!
Gyllenhaal, Pine in Talks to Join INTO THE WOODS Movie?
John Bantay Talks to Richard Jay-Alexander About Musical Mondays Farewell
BWW TV Exclusive: Prince, Lewis & More Remember Kevin Gray
BWW Interviews: ABC's Newest BACHELORETTE Desiree Hartsock
Seth MacFarlane Will Not Host 2014 OSCARS
Rooney Mara is the Face for New Calvin Klein Scent
BWW Reviews: LEGENDS At 30 Is Still Lots of Fun
iWatch Update: Apple Looking Into 1.5 OLED Screens?
BWW Blog: Leah Edwards - Practice. Perform. Repeat
BWW Reviews: John Cranko's ONEGIN at American Ballet Theatre
2013-2014 Season Highlights at Carnegie Hall
joined:5/10/05
Posted: 12/9/12 at 11:50am