Showing posts with label Viola Davis. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Viola Davis. Show all posts

Monday, September 22, 2025

Who is the Next AFI Life Achievement Honoree?

Francis Ford Coppola winning the AFI statue
from past winners George Lucas & Steven Spielberg
With the recent passing of Robert Redford, an interesting trivia topic comes up, one we've talked about on occasion on this blog but not in a few years.  Redford, screen luminary, movie star extraordinaire, film festival pioneer, & Oscar-winning director, has always felt like the oddest person to never win the AFI Life Achievement Awards, one of the highest honors for an actor or director, to the point that I have long-wondered if he just didn't want to accept (it's hard to imagine it was never offered to him).  With his death, though, it invites the question of who will be the next person to win the AFI Life Achievement Award, and I thought it'd be fun to make a Top 10 list of the people I think are likeliest to be next.  Before we get to the list, I came up with a list of criteria that usually hint at who will be the next AFI Life Achievement Award winner.

Age: The average age of a winner is roughly 70, though that's definitely an average and we have seen a pretty wide range of ages winning this (i.e. don't count someone out like Francis Ford Coppola, the  most recent winner, who took it at 86 in April).  19 of the winners have been in their 70's, which is by far the most common age group to have won in, and no victor has been older than 90 (top in age was Lillian Gish) or under 46 (Tom Hanks was the youngest, and that win was criticized enough that I doubt they go for someone that young again).  As a result, bonus points to anyone somewhere between about 65 and 79, though obviously they could and have leaned outside that age range.

Occupation: The award is open to anyone in the film industry, but like most honors, it's more geared toward movie stars.  70% of the winners have been principally known for acting, and all but one of the remaining victors have been film directors (the sole person who was neither was John Williams, and there's really no living behind-the-scenes person who could rival Williams in terms of public perception, so it's going to be a movie star or a director).  The film directors who did make it are extremely well-known, just as famous to the public in recent years as a movie star (think George Lucas, Martin Scorsese, and Steven Spielberg), so don't count on aging directing superstars like Mike Leigh or Ridley Scott, as they likely aren't famous enough.  They're also not American which brings us to...

Geography: This is the American Film Institute Award, and while that title doesn't preclude anyone, it sure helps if you're American.  92% of the winners were Americans upon the time they won (this includes people who enjoyed dual citizenship like Elizabeth Taylor, Nicole Kidman, and Sidney Poitier), which is potentially why foreign-born icons like Charlie Chaplin, Greta Garbo, Marlene Dietrich, & Laurence Olivier never won, and likely why figures such as Anhtony HOpkins or Sophia Loren (who otherwise would have been shoo-ins) haven't taken the honor yet.  The four foreign-born figures who did win (Sean Connery, David Lean, Julie Andrews, and Alfred Hitchcock) don't really have a lot in common, so it's hard to find some commonality to one person getting in if they aren't American other than a lot of fame.

Oscar History: If you're going to be taking the AFI title, it helps (a lot) if you're an Oscar winner.  78% of all of the honorees were at the time of their victory winners of at least one competitive Academy Award, and another ten were nominees (two of which, Henry Fonda & Martin Scorsese, would win competitive Oscars post their AFI ceremony).  The only person to have never been nominated for an Oscar and still win the AFI is Steve Martin, someone you'd be hard-pressed to find an obvious corollary to today.  This pattern has gotten even stronger in recent years-85% of the past twenty recipients were Oscar winners (excluding Martin, George Lucas, & Harrison Ford).  So it's likely that the next person to take the AFI will have won a competitive Oscar.

Gender: The ceremony seems to be trying to correct this in recent years, but it's still very much a boy's club at the AFI.  78% of all winners have been men, and the ceremony has never honored a woman who was solely or principally known as a behind-the-scenes figure (women like Shirley MacLaine, Barbra Streisand, and Diane Keaton have all directed films and won the AFI, but all three made their names in movies as actors).   I also wouldn't read a lot into the last winner being male...it doesn't feel like a tradeoff situation as a rule (i.e. the next could also be a man).

DeMille/Kennedy: There are at least two other awards (other than Oscar) that are a strong indicator of whether or not someone will take the AFI trophy-the Cecil B. DeMille Award and the Kennedy Center Honor.  58% of all winners of the AFI were also DeMille winners and of those who were alive to receive it (the Kennedy Center Honors started last of the three honors, in 1978, so John Ford was dead by the time they rolled around despite having already won the AFI), 70% of the AFI Award victors also won the Kennedy Center Honor.  24 people have pulled off all three.  While the AFI has occasionally led the field (ie someone won it there before they picked up other honors, like Steven Spielberg or Elizabeth Taylor), it's a pretty strong indication if you're primarily known for film and you win one of these trophies that you're going to win one (or both) of the others.  One could make a sincere argument that the list of people who have taken the DeMille or Kennedy Center Honor without also having an AFI is particularly short right now, so AFI may be forced to add a new name to the roster next year.  Of the 16 living DeMille and/or Kennedy Center victors (without an AFI) who have meaningful cinematic contributions, almost all of them have something stopping them from taking this leg of the Cinematic Life Achievement Triple Crown (I started calling it that years ago...and it has not caught on).  There is one non-American (Sophia Loren) and one American more commonly known for citizenship in a different country (Anthony Hopkins).  There are figures with major contributions to cinema but who are more known for TV (Dick van Dyke, Lily Tomlin, Rita Moreno, Billy Crystal) and music (Cher, Bette Midler), and then there are a few figures due to health or antipathy to such things might not show up at all (Joanne Woodward, Woody Allen).  There's also the new stain on the Kennedy Center Honors due to the heavy involvement of President Trump that might make it hard for Sylvester Stallone to get this award given he won with that asterisk next to his name.  That actually only leaves five figures who could be considered real contenders that AFI hasn't picked yet, four of which I'll list in my Top 10, and the fifth of which I'll cite in the Honorable Mentions.

Fame: This is a hard one to quantify, but all of the winners have to be famous, and tend to still be extremely well-known when they won.  This has become even more pertinent in recent years.  Arguably the last time someone who wouldn't have been a household name still the year they won was Robert Wise in 1998, and in the past few years we've seen actors who are very active in modern filmmaking like Diane Keaton, George Clooney, and Denzel Washington take the trophy, so I suspect that the winner next year would either be still revered or quite frankly be someone whom you'd expect to be getting top billing on your local marquee still.  This means that names like Ellen Burstyn, Sissy Spacek, Julie Christie, Faye Dunaway, Mia Farrow, or Goldie Hawn, names that probably have earned this kind of distinction but aren't really household in the same way as Clooney, Streep, & Washington, are going to struggle to get a citation without some sort of revival.  This ceremony is funded by advertising revenue, and as a result they need a bigger name for ratings.

With all of that said, here are my guesses as to who the Top 10 contenders for the trophy are.  Sound off in the comments if you have predictions as well!

Honorable Mentions: Lots of options here, but seven names that come to mind are Anthony Hopkins, Robert Downey, Jr., James Cameron, Ron Howard, Eddie Murphy, Ralph Fiennes, & Jessica Lange.  All of them have debits, ranging from a curmudgeonly persona off-screen that might preclude such an honor to not having a strong enough filmography to not being American, but these are names I wouldn't be shocked get into contention.  I will note that in the past when I've done this prediction list I missed future winners because I didn't know they'd be having a moment (i.e. I had Coppola as someone whose time had likely passed until Metropolis came out and he seemed to make a point of wanting to get these honors on his resumé before he died or to remind people that movie won't be his epitaph), so some of these might be contenders, but I don't see them being immediate threats.

10. Tim Burton

It feels weird not to list a single person primarily known as a director on this list, even though directors rarely win this award, and the concept of the celebrity-director is increasingly passé, but more than Cameron, Howard, or even Quentin Tarantino, it feels like Tim Burton is the kind of guy that gets in with AFI.  Inevitably, he's going to get an Oscar moment at some point, and that will invite conversations about his singular filmography.  In many ways Burton's personality feels at-home here.  He's a California-born director, and similar to someone like Mel Brooks (a past winner) he has made or advanced the careers of a lot of stars (such as Johnny Depp & Winona Ryder) who haven't really had a moment with the AFI, and this would be a way of acknowledging that very successful segment in Hollywood.  Call it a hunch that he could win this.

9. Sally Field

A more conventional choice would be Sally Field, a recent Kennedy Center Honoree, and an actress who has been doing a lot of the "I'm a legend" rounds in recent years (not just taking the Kennedy Center Honor, but also the National Medal of Arts and the SAG Life Achievement Award).  Field is also well-regarded (it helps if you're popular), and has had a diverse career as a two-time Academy Award winner who has gone back-and-forth between populist hits and art-fare.  Also, and most critically, she is one of the rare stars of the 1970's & 80's who still works regularly in major projects and is known to a new generation of moviegoers in a way that, say, Faye Dunaway would not be that hasn't won this yet.  In some ways Jessica Lange makes more sense (she also has had television success in recent years), but for some reason she doesn't seem to be getting these types of awards (and with Trump in office, it's doubtful she'll get help from the Kennedy Center), so I will continue to bet on Field.

8. Viola Davis

You could make a sincere argument that Davis shouldn't be on this list.  In terms of leading work in films, she has  the most recent and arguably most scant filmography of these artists.  But there's a sense that Davis, one of the great talents of her generation, was cheated out of a longer career due to Hollywood's inability to give leading roles to Black women, and one wonders if that contributed in part to her recent Cecil B. DeMille Award (don't look at me like that-name another actor with as short of a filmography as Davis has had as a leading star that has won that award).  Only three Black actors have ever won the AFI Life Achievement Award (Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, & Denzel Washington), and none of them have been a woman.  I think Davis makes sense here, particularly with the recent passing of Cicely Tyson, and it's more a question of if, not when, she'll win.  But she's rated lower as I think they make her wait just a few films more before they give her this statue (but it's coming).

7. Brad Pitt

Brad Pitt's wildly successful F1 (can you believe it made over $600 million?!?) earlier this year confirmed what we all know about him-he's one of the last movie stars of his era, someone who can still actually open a movie without creative IP attached (albeit he had the world's largest sport attached, but that's another story).  Pitt's problem is going to be less about his filmography (given his stature in the industry and his long career, it's hard to begrudge him this statue) and more so that Pitt is a bit of an online pariah right now.  That doesn't matter as much in Hollywood (see how he starred in a massive hit movie earlier this year), but advertisers don't want to touch him in an era of a boycott-heavy electorate, and the thorny allegations in his divorce with Angelina Jolie make me think that they might wait a few years to see if things cool down with him (this could also be the case with Johnny Depp & Ben Affleck, who I didn't list on this countdown, but obviously feel in the wheelhouse of someone who would win this).

6. Matt Damon

Pitt's Ocean's Eleven costar Matt Damon feels far more likely to win.  One wonders if they'd consider doing a pair between Damon and his childhood best friend Ben Affleck, but of the two I think that Damon, with his squeaky clean off-screen persona would be an easier sell.  Damon is actually old enough to win one of these statues now (for those wondering if I'm crazy for putting him on here), just a few years north of potential future contenders like Reese Witherspoon and Leonardo DiCaprio, and I think is a serious threat to take this, though I partially believe that he'll get the DeMille first, mostly because they tend to like younger and they love getting movie stars to show up.

5. Jeff Bridges

Robert Redford for many years was my go to answer for "who is the weirdest living person without an AFI Life Achievement Award."  With his death, that title passes to Jeff Bridges.  Bridges is such an odd exclusion from this list I constantly have to remind myself he's never won-he's a movie star from way back (and further back still if you remember he's a NepoBaby), an Oscar winner, and has a fame that means different things depending on how old you are, which is also the sign of someone with a robust filmography.  Bridges is certainly the type of person who should have an AFI Life Achievement Award (it will be a miss, similar to Redford, if he never wins), and if I was asked to unilaterally give this out to someone next year, he'd be my choice.  But his inability to win even when he could've gotten it 10-15 years ago makes me wonder if he's demurred, or isn't really on their radar.

4. Samuel L. Jackson

Bizarrely, Samuel L. Jackson has never won any of the three major Triple Crown Awards, though he did recently get an Honorary Oscar.  Jackson is a ubiquitous movie star, perhaps not to his credit (it's worth noting that Michael Caine never won any of these three prizes either, mostly because he had so much crap to go with the jewels in his filmography), but Jackson is such a big star it feels wrong that he doesn't win this award.  In many ways, between his forays into countless major franchises (Star Wars, MCU, Jurassic Park, XXX) to his position as a muse for both Quentin Tarantino and Spike Lee he is the prototype for how to navigate the IP era, so you have to believe they know they should pick him, particularly given the embarrassingly low number of Black actors who have won this prize.

3. Tom Cruise

The Top 3 are not a question of if, but when, for the victory.  All three are 1990's movie stars who have stayed relevant into the 2020's (sometimes for television, sometimes in the case of #3 for mining his filmography for legacy sequels), but they are all too famous to never win this award.  Cruise is third both because he is about to win an Honorary Oscar (and in my opinion, likely to win a competitive one next year too, which makes the Honorary statue feel like a waste when it could've gone to, say, Catherine Deneuve who needs it more), but Cruise has graduated beyond the tabloid toxicity that once nearly wrecked his career (i.e. another reason they'll likely wait on Brad Pitt), and has become the savior of the movie theater industry.  The ageless screen star probably doesn't like that he's now at the age where you win lifetime achievement awards, but it'd be nice if he won it while some of his earliest costars (like Dustin Hoffman & Jack Nicholson) are still around to give it to him.

2. Julia Roberts

Another ageless movie star that feels like she's too young to win this, but has entered that era is Julia Roberts (our Star of the Month last month!).  There's more urgency around Roberts to win, in part because she's clearly the Queen of the 1990's movie stars (you could see a world where, say, Sandra Bullock or Demi Moore also win this statue at some point, but not before Julia), and also because she seems to be itching to do this again.  In recent years she's been working more regularly, appearing in films that might gain a reputation (even if it's a bad one) like Luca Guadagnino's latest, and clearly wants to cement her place as one of the last great movie stars before IP took over Tinseltown.  Roberts, in a similar fashion to Cruise, also wants to get this statue while all of the actors whom she starred opposite early in her career are still with us (as sad as it may seem Richard Gere is 76, Dustin Hoffman in 88, & it's unlikely most of her older costars in Steel Magnolias stay around much longer)...this would be the time to give it to her.

1. Jodie Foster

But I'm going to put someone who has the DeMille (unlike Julia & Tom) at #1.  Jodie Foster doesn't have as plentiful of a filmography as Roberts & Cruise (and isn't famous in the same way anymore), but her two Oscars and recent successful run on True Detective add a timelessness to her star persona that you can't really rust.  I also think it's noteworthy that she's a feminist icon, and a film director (and would be the first openly queer person to win the award).  As I stated above, no woman has ever won this award primarily for being known for directing, but several have histories with directing, and Foster would add to that list.  She's also 62, so just a few years shy of the prime age that wins this award, and giving it to her early is hardly a moment that will age poorly (no one really focuses on winning too early if it was someone who was always destined to win).  If I had to bet on who wins next, I'd put my money on her.

Saturday, August 30, 2025

Eat Pray Love (2010)

Film: Eat Pray Love (2010)
Stars: Julia Roberts, James Franco, Richard Jenkins, Viola Davis, Billy Crudup, Javier Bardem
Director: Ryan Murphy
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

Each month, as part of our 2024 (and now 2025) Saturdays with the Stars series, we are looking at the women who were once crowned as "America's Sweethearts" and the careers that inspired that title (and what happened when they eventually lost it to a new generation).  This month, our focus is on Julia Roberts: click here to learn more about Ms. Roberts (and why I picked her), and click here for other Saturdays with the Stars articles.

In Notting Hill, there's a memorable scene (possibly the best scene) of Julia Roberts saying "one day, my looks will go, they will discover I can't act, and I will become some sad middle-aged woman who looks a bit like someone who was famous for a while."  In real life, Roberts got a happy ending (and her looks will likely never go-movie star beauty has more endurance than us mere mortals), marrying her husband of 20+ years Danny Moder in 2002.  But her career would never have the same sort of sparkle that it did in the years after her unmatched 1997-2002 run.  Roberts would get $25 million for Mona Lisa Smile in 2003, but the film didn't live up to the giant grosses of Notting Hill and Runaway Bride, and she would spend much of the next two decades alternating between forgettable mid-sized vehicles (Larry Crowne, Duplicity, Mother's Day, Money Monster), and attempts at prestige that went nowhere for her in terms of a return to the Oscars (Charlie Wilson's War, Secret in Their Eyes, and the best of her films/performances during this era, Closer).  While she did get an Oscar nomination in 2013 (for August: Osage County), Roberts, at one point the biggest star in the world, had to resort to category fraud to secure her nomination since it was felt she couldn't compete with costar Meryl Streep, an actress in a different lane than her in the 1990's, but by 2013 Streep had become a far more consistent box office presence.  Just two live-action films during this era can be called "true" hits, ones that would have fit in with her 1990's runs, both out in 2010-the much-maligned Valentine's Day, and our final movie with Roberts, Eat Pray Love, which would set off enormous conversation about the film itself, and would become shorthand for a specific type of "rich white woman finding herself" motif in the years that followed.

(Spoilers Ahead) Eat Pray Love is about the spiritual awakening of Liz Gilbert (a real-life journalist played by Roberts) who decides that the unrest she feels in her marriage to Stephen (Crudup) is too much, and as part of the divorce (and a recent breakup with an actor, played by Franco), she leaves her life in New York City, upending herself financially, and moves to a series of destinations (Italy, India, & Indonesia) where she can try to find meaning in her life.  In these places, she finds friendship, life, adventure, experiences, and food (so, so much food), but until Bali, when she finally opens herself up to a man named Felipe (Bardem), she doesn't admit that what she needs is a willingness to take a risk again, to feel open with another person.  In doing so, and getting married to Felipe, she finally resets the clock, and lives more fully.

You'll notice that I didn't write as much about the plot of Eat Pray Love as I normally do in these reviews, and there's a reason for that-for a film that is 140 minutes long, not a lot really happens.  Sometimes this isn't a bad thing-there are moments in this that are just about watching the simple pleasures of life like a thoughtful meditation or eating a plate of pasta with friends, that gives you a sense of what Liz is trying to get out of this travel.  As someone who is going to go on a trip to Europe in a few weeks (and am, like Liz, both really hopeful that it will give me some new perspectives as well as honestly terrified about taking a leap, by myself, into a place I don't know and into locales where I don't speak the languages), I can understand this.  One of the hallmarks of Eat Pray Love was that it did market a sort of romance about travel that you still see today in lifestyle shows on Netflix and Food Network.  The movie frequently plays with the concept of "cultural appropriation" without really acknowledging that as a concept, but it also does so in a way that at least feels celebratory of those cultures...this is truly about trying to learn about yourself by seeing (and respecting the world).  Liz does not pretend she is an expert in the lives of any of the people she meets, just that she's better for having met them...which feels less like cultural appropriation to me (which this movie has been accused of) and more like cultural appreciation, which I think is a fairer categorization.

But the movie doesn't have much to do beyond that, and in being so long (and in making Liz's journey so central to the story) it falls flat.  Roberts, in her early forties here, looks and acts as beautiful-as-ever, radiant in every moment, but no one else matches that charisma (including the dialogue).  In a sea of potential leading man, neither Franco, Crudup, nor Bardem seem worthy of Roberts herself (even if they might be good enough for the less impressive Liz, who is unusually indecisive for a woman headed into the fifth decade of her life).  Not even a short part for Viola Davis (just off her first Oscar nomination and about to become a movie star in her own right) makes much of a difference here.  The film looks great (putting 3-time Oscar winner Robert Richardson behind the camera can have that effect), but it's empty when you think about it for longer than a minute.

Roberts, as you will know, is still working.  In 2022, she starred in her first non-ensemble romantic comedy since 2011 with George Clooney in Ticket to Paradise (another movie that looks great but needed a much better script), and will be taking on her most interesting-looking role in years in Luca Guadagnino's After the Hunt later this fall.  What's in store is a question mark for an actress that perpetually redefines herself (even though she'll always be the exact same Julia Roberts to some audiences, that twinkling waitress they fell for in Mystic Pizza).  Next month, we're going to conclude our sixth season with the woman that spent all of the 1990's as Roberts' chief rival for the title of America's Sweetheart, one whom the media was far kinder too, but unlike Roberts, when she fell from grace, she wasn't able to recover.

Wednesday, January 10, 2024

No Globe? No SAG? No Problem!

This morning we saw the SAG nominations, and with the Globes held this weekend, that means we get to write one of my favorite recurring annual articles on the blog-our annual look at the few performers whose dreams of Oscar glory have seemingly been dashed by not getting in with either of these high-profile precursors...who still could be in for a wonderful night in a few weeks at the Dolby Theater.  Every year since 2006, at least one actor has gotten a nomination for an Oscar without being cited by either the Globes or the SAG Awards, with a much larger number in the past two years:

2022: Brian Tyree Henry, Andrea Riseborough, Judd Hirsch, & Paul Mescal
2021: Penelope Cruz, Jesse Plemons, JK Simmons, Judi Dench, & Jessie Buckley
2020: Paul Raci & LaKeith Stanfield
2019: Florence Pugh
2018: Marina de Tavira & Yalitza Aparicio
2017: Lesley Manville
2016: Michael Shannon
2015: Charlotte Rampling, Tom Hardy, & Mark Ruffalo
2014: Bradley Cooper, Marion Cotillard, & Laura Dern
2013: Jonah Hill

As a general rule, the best way to get another nomination is to get in as a result of your film having heat for either Best Picture or another acting race.  Last year, we saw this with someone like Judd Hirsch, who was starring in a film that was on-track for Best Picture & Actress, and then carried him along with the show.  Last year saw a disproportionately large number of people (Andrea Riseborough, Paul Mescal, & Brian Tyree Henry) who were their films only Oscar nod, which does happen, but this is generally hard to pull off, especially in the ten-wide Best Picture era.  Generally, the new name is someone from a Best Picture nominee that Oscar liked a little bit more than the rest of the season.

I say each year that I'm worried this trend won't continue, but this year I'm especially nervous because of the expansion of the Golden Globes.  This is the first year that the Globes had six nominees for each of the acting races, rather than five.  You can best see how this will hurt this stat by looking at Best Actor in a Drama.   This featured three Oscar frontrunners (Cillian Murphy, Bradley Cooper, & Leonardo DiCaprio) along with three "on the bubble" nominees (Colman Domingo, Andrew Scott, & Barry Keoghan).  In a normal year, one of those "on the bubble" nominees wouldn't have gotten mentioned, and if it had been Scott/Keoghan, would've been in my Top 5 here given the heat off of those films peaking at the right time (Domingo got a Globe nod).  This year, none of them are in the Top 10, and so I had to scrounge a little bit to get a plausible Top 10.  Still, a 14-year streak is going to be tough to beat-one of these names (#1 being the most likely) probably gets on Oscar's radar in two weeks.

Honorable Mention: I'm just going to list a few names that need to be mentioned.  I am still catching up on a few contenders (hence why own personal Top 10 lists haven't been revealed yet), so a couple of performances that I haven't seen include Erika Alexander (American Fiction), Christian Friedel (The Zone of Interest), Aunjanue Ellis (Origin), Jamie Bell (All of Us Strangers), & Juliette Binoche (The Taste of Things).  These all have their champions (and Binoche & Ellis are former nominees, which helps), but without seeing them I don't know if they make sense or even how substantial their roles are...so I'm just naming them for posterity.  Florence Pugh (Oppenheimer), Jesse Plemons (Killers of the Flower Moon), John Magaro (Past Lives), & Taraji P. Henson (The Color Purple) have large supporting parts in Best Picture contenders, but they've been ignored all season, and save for Magaro, they're all former nominees so if they were going to get in...why not get mentioned by SAG or the Globes?  Lastly, I do wonder if AMPAS will like Ferrari more than most, and Penelope Cruz's surprise SAG inclusion means that Adam Driver (a two-time nominee) deserves a mention in this list even if this is probably a miss for him.

10. Rachel McAdams (Are You There God? It's Me, Margaret.)

For Her: McAdams has received some of the best reviews of her career for this Judy Blume adaptation, and there's a lot of passion surrounding her performance, despite it coming out in April.  She even won a surprise inclusion from the Los Angeles Film Critics Association.  Sometimes underestimated when it comes to what screeners get the "Play" button pressed is whether you can watch a movie with your kids-Margaret is far more "let's all sit in front of the couch" friendly than May December or Saltburn.  She's also a former Oscar nominee-AMPAS has liked her before.
Against Her: The film has no shot in any other categories and it's a coming-of-age movie about a girl getting her period that was released almost a year ago.  No matter how good McAdams may be, that was always going to be hard to get past, especially without some help from something like SAG which is more the audience for this style of film.

9. Paul Mescal (All of Us Strangers)

For Him: I mean, he did it last year.  Mescal was able to take a small, family drama last year and ride it to the Oscars, what's to stop him this year?  All of Us Strangers is not necessarily in the Best Picture running, but it does have the kind of heat & interest that would make it a surprise inclusion in the 9th or 10th spot if heat for something that feels more like a "required" nominee (like Maestro) that no one really loves doesn't get in.  Additionally, everyone who sees the movie loves Andrew Scott, which makes him a stealth contender for the competitive fifth Best Actor slot.
Against Him: I haven't seen the movie, but literally any internal competition from Jamie Bell is going to cost him this, as it's already a small film...will Bell split his support?  Additionally, this is a film that Oscar voters aren't required to see-will they get to it, or is it just a move they're still saying "I've heard that's good" about come nominations time.

8. Sandra Huller (The Zone of Interest)

For Her: She's having a helluva a year.  Huller didn't get in with SAG, but she managed a Globe nomination for her work in Anatomy of a Fall, which I think will score her her first Oscar nomination in Best Actress.  Weirdly, she's also an option in supporting for Zone of Interest, which like All of Us Strangers is in the hunt for 9th or 10th in the Best Picture field.  Huller's supposedly good, and a significant part here.  Could she get double the love?
Against Her: Unlike a lot of past double nominees (like Scarlett Johansson or Al Pacino) she's not super famous headed into the night, and usually you come armed with all of the precursors if you're going to be cited twice.  It's possible, but I'm assuming on her first go-around AMPAS will think Best Actress is enough.

7. Zac Efron (The Iron Claw)

For Him: Efron checks two of the Academy's favorite boxes.  One, he's a matinee idol transforming himself physically for a role, and two, he's in the middle of something of a comeback, giving his most lauded performance to date after years as a teen idol.  A family drama and a biopic, this is in Oscar's wheelhouse (Mickey Rourke got nominated for a similar film a few years back), and it has a lot of fans.
Against Him: Efron is the sort of contender that the Globes normally would've gone for (not sure if that's because we're in a post-HFPA world or not, but a celebrity like him normally would've been able to sneak in over Andrew Scott).  Will enough people see it...and will enough respond given Efron's otherwise shallow acting resumé (unlike Rourke, Efron didn't spend a decade giving critically-acclaimed, edgy performances before Oscar noticed).

6. Ben Affleck (Air)

For Him: Affleck is a strange beast in Hollywood-someone well-loved by the Academy behind-the scenes (he has Oscars for writing and producing, and directed a Best Picture winner), but who has never been nominated for an Oscar for acting despite matinee idol good looks and appearing in many of his movies.  His latest directorial effort, Air, is a film I think is going to get into Best Picture (I haven't written my final nominations yet, but it'll be on there as my surprise guess unless something bizarre happens with the PGA/DGA/BAFTA citations), and since no film has only gotten a Best Picture nomination since 1943, if it gets in one place, it'll probably get in another.
Against Him: I think that most agree that Affleck, unlike his buddy Matt Damon, is better behind-the-scenes than in front of the camera, and while this is a showy part, there's a more traditional role for the Academy to cite in Air if they feel so inclined.  Also, Best Supporting Actor is already bursting at the seams without adding someone like Affleck into the conversation.

5. Claire Foy (All of Us Strangers)

For Her: Foy is one of the most recognized actresses on television, she's British (the Academy loves British actresses), and she works in a lot of prestige films that have gotten on Oscar's radar (First Man, Women Talking).  Her work in All of Us Strangers as the main character's mother isn't work I've seen yet, but from what I've heard it's strong, scene-stealing stuff, and if the film is peaking at the right time (which it is), like Paul Mescal, I could see her being in the running.
Against Her: At this point, Foy has been turned down by the Academy twice.  Similar to Emily Blunt (who after two decades is finally going to get an Oscar nomination in two weeks for Oppenheimer after basically begging the Academy every year for it), it's possible she's just not their cup of tea?  If she can't get in for a Best Picture nominee, why this?

4. Viola Davis (Air)

For Her: As I mentioned above, there's a more traditional option in Air if AMPAS wants to nominate it for an acting trophy than Ben Affleck, and that's Oscar-winning actress Viola Davis.  Davis gets a showy supporting part as Michael Jordan's mother, plays well off of Matt Damon (whom, it is worth noting, did get a Golden Globe nomination for this film), and we know Oscar loves her.  They also might feel they owe her after she missed last year for an expected nomination for The Woman King.
Against Her: She still has a trophy, so it's not like ignoring her for The Woman King was a major crime.  More importantly, it's possible I'm overestimating Air's strength.  It came out last spring, and hasn't shown up on a lot of year-end lists.  Maybe it's just one of those movies people liked, but doesn't score with Oscar, in which case Davis is a non-entity.

3. Matt Damon (Oppenheimer)

For Him: Our top three contenders I'm going all in on movies that all of the Academy's acting branch will have seen by the time the nominations start, but feature three performers with prominent roles in those films that haven't gotten mention yet.  Damon's lack of a nomination has perplexed me all season.  In a sea of options, he and Downey are the only two supporting actors who are clearly prominent enough in terms of screen-time to stand out from the crowd.  Given his personal popularity (as well as love for Oppenheimer), why isn't he showing up?
Against Him: Damon's problem is twofold.  One, his internal competition, particularly from Robert Downey, Jr. who is going to win this category with Oscar, means that spreading-the-wealth feels like the correct choice (Oppenheimer isn't hurting for love).  Second, the supporting actor race is stacked this year, the strongest contenders and the most quality options of any of the four acting races.  This would feel like a "weak field" filler nomination, not needed for 2023.

2. Dominic Sessa (The Holdovers)

For Him: The Holdovers is an acting trio, one that features two people who are surefire nominees (and potential winners): Da'Vine Joy Randolph & Paul Giamatti.  Their counterpart Dominic Sessa, though, has gotten plenty of good notices for his screen debut in The Holdovers.  It's a lead performance that is being passed off as supporting (that always helps), and if you're a fan of the movie, you might just want to put down one actor for each category.
Against Him: He's so young.  This is his first film, and in a category where they tend to nominate longtime veterans (like Willem Dafoe or Mark Ruffalo, both also on the edge for this category), they might want to make him pay his dues.  Plus, given The Holdovers didn't get into Best SAG Cast (usually a prerequisite for a Best Picture nomination), this might be a movie that voters more like than love.

1. America Ferrera (Barbie)

For Her: Everyone loves Barbie.  Even if you aren't a fan of the movie itself, in an industry town that had a lower-than-expected box office last yeaer, everyone knows that Barbie is a movie they should be grateful for.  Ferrera is a longtime character actress who weirdly (despite the large female cast) will be the only Supporting Actress option from the film.  People love her monologue scene in the picture, and she's been pushing the movie hard.  These are all things that usually add up to a surprise inclusion.
Against Her: Unless Jodie Foster or Danielle Brooks fall (both are on shaky, but likely, ground), this is really a fifth slot play against Viola Davis (Air), Julianne Moore (May December), Penelope Cruz (Ferrari), and Rosamund Pike (Saltburn).  None of those are Best Picture nominee locks like Barbie is, but unlike Ferrera, they're all former Oscar nominees/winners who come armed with precursors (save Davis).  Still...I think I'll probably guess Ferrera because her math feels really good in this scenario.

Wednesday, June 22, 2022

OVP: Actress (2020)

OVP: Best Actress (2020)


The Nominees Were...

Vanessa Kirby, Pieces of a Woman
Frances McDormand, Nomadland
Carey Mulligan, Promising Young Woman

My Thoughts: We are finishing off our acting races with the Best Actress contest.  2020 will remain, forever, a weird anomaly of a year for the Oscars, and one that changed the movie industry permanently(?).  While some of these films were advertised in theaters (I distinctly remember watching the Promising Young Woman trailer in a theater), none of them had much of a screen presence (the only one I remember seeing on a marquee was Nomadland and even that was after it'd won the Oscar).  I saw all five of these in my house, all while I was stuck inside largely quarantined off from virtually all of my friends.  I still wonder if some of these movies would've played differently had I been able to see them my preferred method of in a movie theater.

Promising Young Woman certainly would've gained from an audience.  Watching this ticking clock comedy-thriller come to its inevitable conclusion would've been a jaw-dropper in a crowded theater.  People overuse the phrase "her best work" to describe an actress's most recent excellent work so I won't say that this is the best thing I've seen Carey Mulligan do...but it's close.  While she sometimes struggles to ground Cassie (the script doesn't let us into her & an actor can only do so much), that doesn't mean that she can't find ways to hint at who Cassie used to be, particularly with the great chemistry she has with Bo Burnham.  Mulligan finds a way to make her Cassie both moral and frightening...she finds a way to make us examine our own culpability in a culture that values statis more than changing for the better (even if that's uncomfortable).

Nomadland is the other movie that I wished I'd seen on the big screen in particular (like I said, I would've preferred seeing all of these on a big-screen in a perfect world).  The expanses of America's heartlands would've looked magical shining on a silver screen.  Frances McDormand doesn't upstage these gorgeous views, but instead complements them.  McDormand has built her career playing brassy, scene-stealing characters, but none of that pretense is in her Fern.  Mildred Hayes & Marge Gunderson (her other two Oscar-winning roles) are totally alien to this part-we get a woman who has found a peace in the world that she can't explain, and perhaps doesn't want to, particularly to herself.  She sees herself as a winner even if the world can't comprehend that, and there's something magnificent in the way she centers Fern amongst the wide parking lots & green forests of this film.

Vanessa Kirby was so good on The Crown I was glad she could get a nomination at the Oscars right out the gate, hoping that could catapult her into a different echelon of opportunity as an actress.  But Pieces of a Woman is not a complete performance.  Once you get past the brutal opening scene (with no cutaways, it feels like you're watching a horror movie), there's nothing more added to Kirby's Martha.  We never understand what she wants in her career, what she wanted in motherhood, what she wants in her relationship with her construction worker husband (is the sex just that good, because it's literally the only thing they seem to have in common?).  Kirby needs to give us more to make some of the bigger climax scenes in the movie work out, and they don't.

The same can be said for Viola Davis.  I'm not going to side with the "category fraud" people on this one-she's the title character, she's in a significant chunk of the movie...she's a lead.  The reason she might not feel like a lead is that Chadwick Boseman is significantly better than her onscreen.  While Davis initially plays Ma as an enigma, something that might work if the script were different, as it becomes more crucial to understand Ma, we don't get enough from Davis to really feel like we're in her shoes.  The biggest issue I have here is that Davis doesn't sing the part-there's something lacking in her (obvious) lip-syncing, and we don't get a complete performance.  There's still moments of wonder (it's Viola Davis) but when it comes to Oscar, particularly from a woman of her talent, I expect more.

Andra Day is singing in Billie Holliday, but her problem isn't that she doesn't sound great (she does), but that's not the issue with this performance.  Saddled with a really bad film (something Davis doesn't have to deal with), Day can't find a way to rise above the muck.  Lee Daniels' film is an absolute mess of jumbled ideas & half-baked narrative hooks, and while I try to distinguish individual elements as much as possible with these OVP writeups, I can only do so much.  Day's work is intertwined in Daniels' messy narrative, and you can still see the "tick, tick, tick" of her trying to combine the Billie she's crafting with the one on the page that's lacking.  A more experienced actress might have found a way to just push past the mess & give us her own interpretation of the work, but Day is still a new onscreen performer and doesn't seem to have that skill yet, so anything worthwhile here gets lost in the crowd.

Other Precursor Contenders: The Globes separate their nominations between Drama and Musical/Comedy, so we have ten women nominated for these awards.  For Drama it was a carbon copy of the eventual Oscar lineup, except Andra Day won while Best Comedy/Musical went to Rosamund Pike (I Care a Lot) in a huge surprise against Anya Taylor-Joy (Emma), Kate Hudson (Music), Maria Bakalova (Borat 2), & Michelle Pfeiffer (French Exit).  SAG gave their statue to Davis, and kept the Oscar lineup save for Andra Day, instead choosing Amy Adams (Hillbilly Elegy).  BAFTA went with McDormand as their winner, here up against Kirby, Alfre Woodard (Clemency-she was eligible the previous year at the Oscars), Bukky Bakray (Rocks), Radha Blank (The Forty-Year-Old Version), & Wunmi Mosaku (His House).  At the time I guessed that Sophia Loren (The Life Ahead) was next up, and I think in a normal year where we would've seen Loren on every red carpet the star power would've been too much for Oscar to ignore (or had the legend gone supporting, which she could've gotten away with), but in 2020 where there were few in-person events her publicists couldn't play that card and so it was likely Amy Adams nearly getting her seventh nomination for Hillbilly Elegy.
Actors I Would Have Nominated: If they were going to cite it for International Feature Film, there's no reason that Oscar should've denied Jasna Duricic's riveting work in Quo Vadis, Aida, which towers over most of these nominees.
Oscar’s Choice: In what was a total coin toss (save for Kirby, every one of these women had momentum going into Oscar night), AMPAS decided to give a third statue to Frances McDormand, who clearly would've preferred anyone else getting the victory.
My Choice: I'm also going with McDormand.  Similar to Anthony Hopkins, this is a performance in a special category, and while (like Hopkins) it's hard to say "best of their career" given the career she's had, it probably earns that title.  Mulligan, Davis, Kirby, & Day follow her.

Those are my thoughts, but now I want to hear yours!  With the dust settled, does everyone kind of agree that McDormand deserved this, or do other performances still have their champions?  I think we all kind of assume Davis will become the first Black woman to win two acting Oscars-when do you think she pulls it off?  And Adams, Loren, or someone else-who is your sixth place guess?  Share your thoughts in the comments below!


Past Best Actress Contests: 20032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016, 201720182019

Tuesday, December 22, 2020

OVP: Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (2020)

Film: Ma Rainey's Black Bottom (2020)
Stars: Viola Davis, Chadwick Boseman, Glynn Turman, Colman Domingo
Director: George C. Wolfe
Oscar History: 5 nominations/2 wins (Best Actor-Chadwick Boseman, Actress-Viola Davis, Costume*, Production Design, Makeup & Hairstyling*)
Snap Judgment Ranking: 3/5 stars

August Wilson is one of the towering figures of the American stage, a brilliant playwright who only four years ago (posthumously) was able to translate one of his titanic works to the screen, with 2016's Fences.  Denzel Washington has stated he intends to produce every one of Wilson's ten "Pittsburgh Cycle" films to the screen in the coming years, with Ma Rainey being the second one.  With Fences, I felt it was a gorgeous screenplay, but one that didn't translate properly to the movies, frequently feeling like a screened play rather than one that was authentic to the cinema itself, and in the process parts of it felt too loud & lost (even with solid actors & writing).  Ma Rainey adds new complications to this problem by occasionally feeling like it's letting the air out of the story's claustrophobia, even if (once again) the writing is of another realm.

(Spoilers Ahead) The movie takes place in Chicago in the 1920's.  Ma Rainey (Davis) is the "Mother of the Blues," the biggest African-American music act in the country, and she knows that she has this little perch of power even if she is unable to enjoy the same luxuries & treatment a white woman in her position would achieve.  The film alternates between Ma's moments of reflection & "star" behavior, and counters it with her band, principally her trumpet player Levee (Boseman), who has a new musical style & wants to find his own voice & success, rather than staying in Ma's shadow.  As the film wears on, the two characters are given more backstory to the audience, with Ma showing the struggles she has with the white men in her life, knowing she's only worth anything to them because of her voice (and the money that it brings), while Levee cannot escape the trauma of his childhood (when white men gang-raped his mother).  The other bandmates watch as Ma, who has survived & will continue to be the exception, gets to continue her success even though it's one that isn't commensurate to the money & success it affords her label, but knowing that Levee will meet his doom with his youthful impetuousness.  In the film's closing moments, Levee is fired by Ma, and it turns out that the songs that he was going to record for the label, the ones he'd been promised to record, will be sold for a mere pittance to the label instead.  In a blind rage, after one of the other bandmates accidentally scuffs the shoes Levee bought in the opening scene (and can no longer afford), he kills him, the violence of his childhood continuing on into his adulthood, finally consuming his hope & promise.

The movie has a heavy conversation about the value of black artistry & its exploitation by white capitalists, a conversation that has never really been settled, and one that sadly even in 2020 is worth having.  The movie's juxtaposition of Ma, who is the rare black woman of the era who can demand more (but knows that she can't demand what she's truly worth) with Levee (whose talent is apparent in the end when his song is recorded lifelessly by an all-white orchestra, depriving him of his chance at Ma's success) is heartbreaking.  Wilson shows the ways that for centuries black talent has been stolen with little profit to the creators, and frequently the artists who created it were barely given credit, much less its monetary value, for their workm.  Wilson's rapid-fire dialogue & insightful speeches create a well-rounded story, one that deserved to be committed to the screen.

But the film struggles once again to find its footing within the confines of the screen.  I know some enjoy the concept of a filmed play (there are times this is successful onscreen), but Ma Rainey can't find a balancing act here.  The play appears to take place entirely in the recording studio, giving a heightened tension that would work so well on the stage, and I suspect would've been a better choice for the film (the scenes shot outside almost never work as well).  This expansion gives the viewer too much exposition toward Ma's character, a problem that feels necessary because while Davis is good in this part, she doesn't bring enough backstory to her Ma.  Ma feels like she's meant to have some enigma at first, this sort of unicorn siren who is able to defy the world around her despite her race & sexuality being at odds with the moneyed culture she's surrounded by, but as the movie moves on we need to gain an understanding of Ma, and it doesn't quite click for me as Davis goes.  It doesn't help that Davis doesn't sing the part, and her lip syncing feels hollow during the moments where we need to understand Ma the most.  She's too good of an actress to totally miss this, but the connection to Ma just isn't there the way it's supposed to be.

Or perhaps Viola Davis just gets upstaged, as Chadwick Boseman (despite the title) ensures that he is the star of this production.  The late Boseman has some of the same problems that come to Davis (his monologues feel like they're pitched to a giant live audience rather than someone sitting on their couch...this movie definitely misses in moving out of theaters), but he lands some of his biggest moments.  The final scenes, where Levee understands that the vengeance he's idolized for his father, and told in his head was worth it, was in fact just the same white men who he sought revenge on stealing his father's future the way they did his mother, that this vengeance was just another robbery of his childhood & a cycle he can't escape...it's gut-wrenching stuff.  It's impossible to escape the real-life fact that this will be Boseman's swan song after his shocking death from cancer earlier this year, and this informs some of his monologues about death & "the future" in ways that feel so cruel as we understand what Levee's fate will be, his artistry never getting the chance to fully blossom.  I get the reason to add on an additional scene (with the white men singing in a chorus of Levee's song, showing that the profiting still continues), but it feels like a cheap way to take away from the best parts of Boseman's work, and give the audience some reprieve from the harrowing robbery of one man's spirit that has taken place under their noses for 90 minutes prior.

Monday, April 20, 2020

OVP: Supporting Actress (2016)

OVP: Best Supporting Actress (2016)

The Nominees Were...


Viola Davis, Fences
Naomie Harris, Moonlight
Nicole Kidman, Lion
Octavia Spencer, Hidden Figures
Michelle Williams, Manchester by the Sea

My Thoughts: All right, we're getting back into our regular Monday & Wednesday articles for OVP ballots today, and where last we left off, we were heading into one of my favorite categories, Best Supporting Actress.  2016's acting races were perhaps the first warning sign that the expanded Best Picture field was truly starting to cause laziness in the Oscars, as you can see here most plainly-every single one of these women are nominated for films that were cited for the top prize.  We're going to do something we rarely do in these write-ups since I'm getting back into the swing of them, and start with the victor since we don't have a lot of other things distinguishing the contest.

Viola Davis is an extraordinary actor, and one who definitely deserved to win an Oscar at some point in her career, but I do question the film she won it for.  For starters, this is a lead performance-you can quibble & fret all you want about this being Troy's story, but it's really the story of Troy & Rose's marriage, and she should have gone lead (I honestly think she might have still won Best Actress in such a field).  So knock off a star for category fraud, as well as for not really transitioning this to the big screen.  Davis & Washington are exceptional, and this must have been a helluva show at the Cort, but on the big screen they don't feel authentic or real enough for my taste-there's not enough modulation, especially compared to what Stephen Henderson is doing.  Davis is great in some of her quieter moments, particularly when she and Washington discuss his love child & lord knows the woman can deliver a monologue, but I'll be honest-this is the least of Davis' three nominated performances for me, and I wish she'd have won for either of the other films instead (she took both OVP's).

Davis' The Help costar would soon tie her record for most-nomiated black actress in 2017, but here she is getting a role that on-paper feels like a slam dunk for Octavia Spencer.  She plays her Dorothy with determination, and though obviously based on a real person, it is a role that feels like it was written with Spencer in-mind.  That said, she still lands it, and finds ways to modulate the work to make sure that it fits.  Look at the subtle ways she makes Dorothy's confidence ebb-and-flow depending on who is in the room (though it's always there in her posture and dialogue), or the killer way she dresses down Kirsten Dunst without it ever feeling like a screenplay ploy.  Spencer is oftentimes taken for granted, but adding richness and warmth to a movie is a rare skill, and should be appreciated-Hidden Figures is the better for her appearing in it.

The same cannot be said for Nicole Kidman, who by most definitions is a world-class actress who definitely should be sitting on more Oscar nominations than she currently has.  I don't think that she handles her "white savior" role with enough delicacy and realism-there's not enough of her complicated relationship with Mantosh, and it feels glossed over to keep the movie bright and "universal" for audience members who look more like Kidman than Dev Patel.  Kidman is too good of an actress to totally fail-she finds some humanity in her relationship with Sunny, but it's not enough, and is one of the drawbacks to the film's weaker second half.

Naomie Harris is the only actor who appears in all three parts of the Moonlight triptych, and thus gets arguably the most difficult task in the film-finding ways to connect with three different actors with a similar (but not too similar) chemistry, while also showing a woman who has moved & struggled through her life.  Harris nails this-the accent is spot-on, and I loved the way we initially view her as a competent, harried mother, and once we learn the secrets of her behavior toward her son, we can never unseen that, even in later scenes where she desperately wants for us (and Chiron) to unsee what we've experienced.  Harris is spectacular, finding a woman increasingly marginalized by her son and society, using what little power she has to try to find her way into both, and then when she realizes the damage she's done, understanding that she can't change the past.

Our final nominee is Michelle Williams, who compared to some of the competition is practically giving a cameo in Manchester by the Sea (one of the reasons I dock a "star" for category fraud is that it's simply unfair that Williams has to compete with Davis, who is in an hour more movie than Williams is).  I am a big fan of Williams, but have found her leaning too much in the "less is less" category of acting in recent years, taking her minimalism too for granted.  So imagine me surprised when she shows up and just knocks her Randi out of the park.  The early scenes where she's a stressed mother, normal, relatable, are matched by the plastic sheen she brings to later scenes.  Affleck couldn't get past what happened to their family-he has to force himself to live with it over-and-over.  Williams chose the opposite approach-cutting every tie she had to that person she used to be in hopes that it would save her from drowning in reality.  Look at that scene where she asks him to lunch, and how she can barely handle even that moment, understanding it might mean finding closure in a moment she can't physically acknowledge, and the anguish of knowing that she can't put back together the man she once loved.  Williams is sensational in this part.

Other Precursor Contenders: The Globes weirdly went for a carbon copy of the Oscars, something they had not done since 1996 (and that year was cheating, as the HFPA went with six nominations instead of Oscar's five due to a tie).  SAG did the same thing, and Viola Davis won both, indicating a shocking lack of creativity when it came to this field that year.  BAFTA also went for Davis, but at least they found a new name, throwing out Spencer in favor of Hayley Squires in I, Daniel Blake.  In terms of sixth place, it's hard to tell with such uniformity.  Other names being bandied about at the time were Greta Gerwig (20th Century Women), Molly Shannon (Other People), Lily Gladstone (Certain Women), and Janelle Monae (Hidden Figures), the latter being my guess considering that was the one movie that proved popular with Oscar, even if Gladstone got the LAFCA trophy.
Actors I Would Have Nominated: Overall, this isn't a bad lineup-there's a reason there was so much uniformity in the precursors-this was a relatively light year for great supporting actress performances.  That said, I surely would have included Monae, who wasn't just awesome in Hidden Figures, announcing herself as a proper movie star, but also in her small role in Moonlight.  I also would have found time for Dakota Johnson, whose nymph in A Bigger Splash is fascinating character work, and kind of announced her as an actress to watch.
Oscar’s Choice: Category fraud, yes, but it's probably better for the world that Viola Davis has an Oscar.
My Choice: A pretty close race for me between Harris & Williams.  I'm going to go with Harris in a slight nod over Williams if only because it's a more difficult part to get across in such a short time frame.  Following them would be Spencer, Davis, and then Kidman.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Pretty much everyone went with Davis, so I assume I'm in the minority by picking Harris-or does someone want to join me on Team Moonlight?  Why do you think there was so much uniformity when it came to this category from precursors?  And who do you think was the sixth place finisher of this field-with so few names in the mix, I'm curious who you think nearly made it?  Share your thoughts below!


Past Best Supporting Actress Contests: 20072008200920102011201220132014, 2015