Ocean's 8 (2018)

Film: Ocean's 8 (2018)
Stars: Sandra Bullock, Cate Blanchett, Anne Hathaway, Mindy Kaling, Sarah Paulson, Awkwafina, Rihanna, Helena Bonham Carter, James Corden
Director: Gary Ross
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

While I don't have the free weekend I was expecting, I do want to get a few reviews that have been sitting around my "To Do" list out in the next few days, so expect a couple of peaks at movies you've probably already discussed, but I still want to put on the record.  The first of these reviews is Ocean's 8, the recent spinoff of the Clooney/Pitt/Damon revival of the Rat Pack pictures (man, originality is dead, ain't it?) which gives the franchise an entirely female remake as Sandra Bullock (playing Debbie Ocean, sister to George Clooney's Danny Ocean) takes over as the heist ringleader, this time attempting to steal a diamond necklace from the Met Gala.

(Spoilers Ahead) There are only a few genres I'd genuinely say that I like pretty much every time, but heist pictures are probably toward the top of the list (for the record, film noir, westerns, and anything where Vincent Price plays a villain would be the rest).  There's something wonderful about seeing the intricacies of a con being perpetrated, and indeed that's the best part of this film.  These are talented actresses, and even the ones that aren't known as great actors (specifically Awkwafina and Rihanna) are compelling enough presences offscreen that they're fascinating to watch, and as a result seeing them sashay around pickpocketing, wearing crazy-awesome couture...it's a dream.  Plus, it helps that everyone here is genuinely funny-the Ocean's pictures are about the comedy, and that was why in my opinion the remakes genuinely were better films than the originals with Sinatra & Martin, a clear case of the original not being that great (it was just cool).

This is to say that I'm usually pretty forgiving with heist pictures, but Ocean's 8 can only stretch that love so far by casting actors I admire and being in a genre I am susceptible to before I have to admit-it's not very good.  I know there was a lot of conversation about this coming from the stars of the film (Mindy Kaling and Cate Blanchett, specifically), decrying male critics for not understanding the audience want for a film like this, and while I am a male critic, I will say that I'm pretty much the target for this as a gay man; I get far more excited seeing Cate Blanchett or Anne Hathaway's name on a call sheet than George Clooney or Matt Damon's.  The problem here isn't the actors, it's that the script is too soggy, routine, and bereft of intimacy to really have us care about any of these characters.

That feels like the only way to really explain how, say, Bullock, who is consistently one of our most charismatic modern movie stars, seems to be on auto pilot most of the film.  Perhaps they should have figured out a way to get Clooney to cameo (I was so sure that'd happen), because she tows the line pretty hard between mourning and revenge, and as a result her Debbie is kind of a downer, and it makes the film heavier than it needs to be.  The comic relief is supposed to come from her motley crew of performers, but they're a mixed bag.  While some are fun (I loved Rihanna's energy as Nine-Ball, even if she's given virtually nothing to do except be Rihanna), Helena Bonham Carter doesn't feel like a person that could exist in reality.  Of all of the characters, her Rose is the one that should be WAY more fun (kooky designer completely out-of-her-element), but in order for her to be this successful, she'd surely have to know how to deal with diva actresses.  That every time she speaks it feels like there's a tick-tick-tick going on in her head, as if HBC herself is wondering whether or not she should be surprised or pretend to be surprised by what is happening, is staggeringly bad, particularly from an actress who is more-than-capable of landing a strange character.  The only supporting player that's truly fun is Anne Hathaway, who is doing a marvelous sendup of the Hatha-hater character people invented around her, and pretty much steals the movie as a spoiled, air-headed actress.

Without more commitment to the characters from the writers or actors, the film falls apart.  It's still fun in doses, and there are some great lines here-and-there, and these stars are too big of STARS for this to be a complete slog, but honestly you leave almost instantly forgetting this existed, and if you remember it all you just recall the lost potential.  Ocean's 8 is a paint-by-numbers heist movie with a world-class cast, which is a damn pity in a summer that has been too generic at the movies.

Our Brand is Crisis (2015)

Film: Our Brand is Crisis (2015)
Stars: Sandra Bullock, Billy Bob Thornton, Anthony Mackie, Scoot McNairy, Ann Dowd, Joaquin de Almeida, Zoe Kazan
Director: David Gordon Green
Oscar History: No nominations
Snap Judgment Ranking: 2/5 stars

Remember this movie from last year?  One of those extremely rare pictures, really the first one since her Oscar win, where Sandra Bullock actually bombed at the Box Office, and yet Bullock (one of my favorite film presences) combined with a movie about politics was too much for me to pass up despite reviews and public reaction that made me raise an eyebrow or two.  The reality is that the public rarely wants to see films about politics (after this cycle, can you blame them?), but I rarely get bored with electoral results and wanted to see if this was a case where I would like the film better than the general populace at large.  Unfortunately, this was a situation where group-think and consensus were the correct decisions, as Our Brand is Crisis is a blustery, poorly-pieced-together look at an unfortunate chapter of American overreach.

(Spoilers Ahead) The film is actually based on the 2002 Bolivian elections, when Stan Greenberg and James Carville, longtime Democratic political operatives most noted for their work on the 1992 Bill Clinton presidential campaign, went to the aid of a conservative former president of the country.  Bullock, in a nice case of gender-blind casting, essentially stood in for Greenberg/Carville as a political operative named Jane Bodine, a woman who was once the toast of the beltway who suddenly saw her world turned upside down with tabloid scandals, alcoholism, and a string of electoral defeats.  The film follows her as she and a political consulting firm try to recast a disgraced former president (de Almeida) as someone who is the answer to Bolivia's problems, despite him seemingly not caring about the poorer people of the country.  In the process, she has to take on her former arch-rival Pat Candy (Thornton), whom she has never beaten in a race and with whom she played very dirty politics that led to her downfall.

It's a great setup for a film, and despite the white savior angle (which is unfortunate, let's just get that out of the way, though it does mirror real life so it might be relatively unavoidable), it has its moments.  Watching some of the ridiculousness in the campaign occasionally finds us in Veep territory, such as when a giant mascot parades next to the ill-tempered former Bolivian president, or when a goat is somehow randomly killed mid-commercial.  Bullock is an extremely watchable star, and her work here, while nowhere near as powerful as her career-best turn in Gravity, is fun and spry.  She gets inside this character, and when she's out bossing around her team or showing her passion for the job, it's intoxicating to watch.  Sideline players like Ann Dowd and Anthony Mackie are always welcome, and here they occasionally get their great moments (can Ann Dowd just be in everything?).

The problem is the film is too broad and basic.  It's obvious that we'll eventually see Jane Bodine, who is in fact good at her job and likely successful in this career precisely because she doesn't get bogged down with caring about a campaign's message, decide that helping the poor people of Bolivia is the right decision for her moral compass, but that's so predictable and probably not that true to real life, let's be honest (Carville and Greenberg are still political operatives trying to swing for a win more than anything else).  The film doesn't have the intellectual heft to examine that Bodine likely needs to be detached in order to win the election; you can't eat the hamburger if you have to constantly look at how it's made.  The film's paint-by-numbers storytelling is weirdly complimented by the bizarre work being done by Thornton, who seems to be both Jane's ex-lover and longtime foil.  His bizarre, grossly-sexual encounters with her are strange, and masked only by Scoot McNairy's weird learning disability situation (for some reason, despite English being his first language, he has trouble with relatively basic words but it's never really acknowledged in the script or played for anything other than laughs, which made me uncomfortable).

As a result, the film is more of a missed opportunity.  I'll probably still see Rachel Boynton's documentary of the same name (Carville is always entertaining), but I left wanting more of the political nitty-gritty and learning about Bodine's clearly capable style than the moral center that plagued the film.  We are too far removed from the days of The Candidate for political films to be shocking in terms of what goes on behind the scenes of politics, but Our Brand feels the need to rehash that same story.

Those were my thoughts on the picture-how about yours?  Anyone want to rush to its defense?  Anyone who has seen the original documentary want to chime in?  And where does Bullock go next in terms of her live-action film career?  Share your thoughts in the comments!

Six Biggest Questions for the Best Actress Race

If there's one thing about this past year and upcoming season of movies that I am thrilled about, it's that the Best Actress field looks amazing.  Seriously-I cannot tell you the last time I was this excited about all of the gourmet prospects set to hit me in the face and the wonderful little movies that I've already had the pleasure of encountering earlier in the year. There's a plethora of names from Oscar-winning stars to longtime character actors getting their due to up-and-coming players to a newcomer that seems to be in literally every film this year.  All-in-all it's a great time if you love women at the movies (and if you don't, what the hell is wrong with you?), but it also begs a few questions.  After all, while great film is by far its own reward, it's worth pondering which of this avalanche of names manages to make it to the Kodak as one of the five lucky contenders for a shiny gold man.  I'm less concerned right now with winners (though it's also exciting that at least as of now there's no one that has clearly positioned themselves at the front of that line either), but more on nominees, which is more exciting anyway (it's only every four years or so that this category is remotely competitive).  The below six questions seem to be the most critical in deciding who will be translating their buzz and reviews into a little bit of Oscar immortality:

1. Who is Committing Category Fraud?

Recent nominees Helen Hunt, Julia Roberts, and Hailee Steinfeld can all agree that getting a nomination is easier if you lie about your role in the film, and despite appearing in a vast majority of their most-recent Oscar-blessed movies, all three of these women scored dubious nominations for their "supporting" work onscreen (Roberts in particular still sticks in my craw since she's in more scenes than Streep who did go lead, gets the final scene, and is one of the biggest movie stars on the planet and could well have gained a lead nomination if she wanted to, letting the likes of her costars Margo Martindale and Julianne Nicholson maybe have a huge career boost from such a citation).  This year seems more than open season for potential category fraud, with the likes of Ellen Page (Freeheld), Rooney Mara & Cate Blanchett (Carol), and Alicia Vikander (The Danish Girl) all oddly positioned to go either lead or supporting, though critics say they should all be competing in the lead race.  Blanchett has a bit of a history with going supporting when she shouldn't (she had nothing to say about such a thing when she did it for Notes on a Scandal), and no film has been nominated twice for Best Actress since Thelma & Louise in 1991 so Carol in particular seems susceptible to fraud.  While I'd love for some campaign to say "screw it" and shoot for the stars (trust me, it would be far better for press for a film like Carol if both Mara and Blanchett were competing against each other in lead, and probably help them much more in gaining actual votes because of the "competition" angle), I'm doubtful.  The question is which of these women decide to go supporting.  In the case of Vikander in particular, this could be a make-or-break moment for women like Kate Winslet, Rachel McAdams, and Jennifer Jason Leigh who are going to be making a play to actually win the supporting trophy (Vikander would start out with a huge advantage considering her film's buzz and the year she's had).  It's also worth noting that a confusing campaign could hurt these women (look at Scarlett Johansson's big miss in 2003) or the Academy could ignore it (Keisha Castle-Hughes and Kate Winslet in The Reader comes to mind).

2. Which Cate do we pick?

Assuming that Blanchett doesn't go supporting for Carol, the Academy is left with its biggest conundrum in this category since perhaps 2001, as Blanchett will have two films that are in contention, not just one.  Both Carol and Truth are star vehicles for Blanchett, who is probably due for an afterglow nomination after her major triumph in Blue Jasmine, but she could end up missing for both because of vote-splitting.  It's worth noting that in 2001 Nicole Kidman was skipped at the SAG Awards for her work in both Moulin Rouge! and The Others, and many people thought that Tilda Swinton or Nia Vardalos might earn a nomination by technicality as Kidman had active campaigns for both films potentially splitting her support.  While Kidman ended up with her first nomination that year, Scarlett Johansson wasn't so lucky two years later.  Blanchett could try the route employed by Kate Winslet in 2008 (pushing one to supporting), but that still only resulted in one nomination for The Reader as the Academy refused such nonsense.  How Blanchett's campaign pans out could play a major role in whether she gets to the Final Five either in lead or supporting (or both).

3. Is the Academy sick of Jennifer Lawrence and David O. Russell?

I can't tell right now whether or not the public is sick of J. Law-it's hard to know, though it's been a while since we have had a movie star that demanded this kind of polarized reactions.  Still, this could be a big moment for the Academy as Joy is clearly designed to continue Russell's amazing consecutive run of Best Picture nominees, and Lawrence could make history as the youngest actor to score four nominations, besting Jennifer Jones.  The question is whether or not this will work for her-if the slight stench coming off the X-Men and Hunger Games franchises (diminishing returns, both commercially and critically) hurts her, she could be in for a surprise snub.  However if she continues to be the star of the moment, it feels like Joy will be yet another chance to reward her (perhaps even with a second trophy).

4. Will the Buzz Translate?

Right now there are four actresses who are clearly critical favorites but who have not had their Oscar moment that could potentially change all that in a few months (again, remember that we don't really have a frontrunner quite yet).  Brie Larson (Room), Emily Blunt (Sicario), Saoirse Ronan (Brooklyn), and Carey Mulligan (Suffragette) have not won much in terms of hardware (and only the latter two have scored with the Oscars), but they're all in positions in their career where a nomination could happen, and all have strong reviews coming out of their respective film festivals.  The question here is what happens as a result of that.  People can go from festival buzz all the way to the Kodak (look at Jennifer Lawrence in Winter's Bone or Gabourey Sidibe in Precious) or they can be completely forgotten like Elizabeth Olsen in Martha Marcy Mae Marlene.  The campaigns for these actresses, as well as public reaction to their relatively small films will be critical, but I would be stunned if 1-2 didn't end up in contention later this year.

5. Time for an Oscar Favorite?

Occasionally Oscar gets a little nostalgic or repetitive, and decides it must have a certain former winner back in the fold for whatever reason.  In 2009, despite Emily Blunt making far more sense on paper (up-and-comer, real-life person, never honored, Globe nominee in Drama) for The Young Victoria, the Academy decided that it must have Helen Mirren randomly nominated for The Last Station, a nomination I am guessing even Mirren herself forgets happened.  Marion Cotillard last year trumped Jennifer Aniston for a similar sort of situation, though here she at least had better reviews.  The question becomes which "longshot" former winner might be invited back for another round in the fifth slot?  I am not counting Blanchett and Lawrence here since they seem more-than-likely to be in the conversation regardless and fifth-slots never actually win the trophy (which both of these women seem like strong possibilities to do), but instead Sandra Bullock (Our Brand is Crisis), Julianne Moore (Freeheld), Maggie Smith (The Lady in the Van), and even Cotillard again for Macbeth.  Bullock probably has the best shot considering the prestige behind her project (from the men who brought you Argo), but any of these women could theoretically make it if they get good enough reviews and Oscar's feeling it.  And then of course it's always unwise to totally discount Meryl Streep, whose work in Ricki and the Flash was light, but then again so was her performance in Music of the Heart and that still got through.

6. Will Anyone Get an "It's Time" Nomination?

One of the sadder things about the Best Actress race is that, unlike the Best Actor field where the likes of Gary Oldman, Mickey Rourke, and Frank Langella all managed to score late-in-their-career "you should have been an Oscar nominee by now" sorts of nominations, the Best Actress field rarely does this, going instead for the tried-and-true former winners/nominees and the PYT's.  This year, however, three women could be looking at their very first trophy, two of them their very first nomination.  Charlotte Rampling (45 Years), Lily Tomlin (Grandma), and Blythe Danner (I'll See You in My Dreams) all three have gotten plaudits from festivals and critics, and in the case of Danner she even got a bonafide hit.  If they were men with the careers they had, we'd likely be pushing them hard for nominations, but this year is ultra competitive and this category isn't as kind to "career achievement" style first nominations.  I suspect that all three will get pushes from their studios, but the question is will any of them catch fire?  Tomlin in particular has been having a major career moment what with the Kennedy Center Honor and a recent TV series/Emmy nomination.  Part of me wonders if she might actually be able to win the thing, if she can land the nomination.

And there you have it folks-the six biggest questions for this year's Best Actress race.  What are your answers to these questions and what five women seem most likely to succeed?  Share your thoughts below!

Oscar's Late-Blooming Actresses

Next week I'll be giving you an article about the overall Best Actress race and my thoughts on how crazy-awesome it looks this year (so many possibilities!), but before I get there I want to focus on one woman in particular who might be able to make a significant impression on the race: Sandra Bullock.  Bullock has a major film coming out that she's getting strong reviews for in Our Brand is Crisis, and at this point it's hard to imagine that she spent most of the Aughts wandering through the wilderness before finally making a major comeback and scoring an Oscar for The Blind Side.

Bullock was 45-years-old when she received her first nomination, which is actually pretty old for an acting nominee, particularly a female nominee.  Most women tend to be nominated in their twenties (I have read the average age for a Best Actress nominee is around 29), and especially those women who are going to be nominated multiple times will have started early.  As a result of this, I was wondering if Bullock gets her third nomination this year (she was also cited for Gravity for those keeping track at home), will she make the list of the Top 10 3+-nominees in terms of age at their first nomination?  Let's take a look at the top ten, shall we?

10. Anne Revere

Age at First Nomination (we'll be going age at the Oscar ceremony): 40
First Nominated Film: Best Supporting Actress in The Song of Bernadette (1943), followed by supporting citations in National Velvet (1945) and Gentleman's Agreement (1947)
Did She Win?: Yes, Revere pulled off the win for playing Elizabeth Taylor's mother in National Velvet, besting two women who are still alive to hold grudges, actually (Dame Angela Lansbury, the youngest person ever to be nominated for two Academy Awards and Ann Blyth, Joan Crawford's demon spawn in Mildred Pierce).
What Took So Long?: Revere was most noted for her work on the stage (she would eventually win a Tony Award for Toys in the Attic), and was more just a contract player who gained steadily in stature in the years that followed Song of Bernadette until she was forced to resign from the Screen Actors Guild because she refused to testify before the House Un-American Activities Committee.
Also Worth Noting: Revere played opposite Taylor six years after her Oscar win as Montgomery Clift's mother in A Place in the Sun.  Despite the film being a huge hit with Oscar and the Academy's penchant for both women, neither would be nominated for the film.

9. Agnes Moorehead

Age at First Nomination : 42
First Nominated Film: Best Supporting Actress in The Magnificent Ambersons (1942), followed by Mrs. Parkington (1944), Johnny Belinda (1948), and Hush...Hush Sweet Charlotte, all in supporting.
Did She Win?: No, Moorehead never made it.  Based on some readings I have done she was probably closest either for The Magnificent Ambersons (where she may have fallen prey to the Orson Welles-hate that was still reverberating from the year before) or for 1964's Hush...Hush, where she was the sentimental favorite but Oscar was very international that year, going with all non-Americans for the first time ever that year rather than the Massachusetts-born Moorehead.
What Took So Long?: Moorehead really struggled early in her career, frequently going without work and even food.  She eventually found success in radio, working with Orson Welles and his Mercury Players.  This resulted in her getting the two most iconic roles in her film career: as Charles Foster Kane's mother in Citizen Kane and her marvelous work as Fanny in The Magnificent Ambersons.
Also Worth Noting: She didn't do particularly well at the Emmys either, never winning for Bewitched, her best-known role overall to modern audiences, though she did pick up an Emmy for her role on The Wild Wild West of all things.

8. Kathy Bates

Age at First Nomination: 42
First Nominated Film: She was first noted for her iconic breakthrough as Annie Wilkes in 1990's Misery, followed by supporting citations for Primary Colors (1998) and About Schmidt (2002)
Did She Win?: She won in a bit of a surprise on her first outing for Misery, a very atypical role for a Best Actress contender, though it's hard to tell if Joanne Woodward or Julia Roberts was her bigger competition.  Eight years later she'd nearly pull off an upset over Judi Dench when she was the only American in a field of Brits (which frequently results in a win for the Yank).
What Took So Long?: Bates was initially one of those character actors who never really popped.  Though she appeared in films for prestigious directors (Milos Forman and Robert Altman), she had more success on the stage, winning a Tony nomination for 'night Mother and eventually transferring to television in a series of soap roles.
Also Worth Noting: In one of those great "what could have been" sorts of moments, Anjelica Huston was originally offered the role of Annie Wilkes, and wanted to do the movie but was committed to making the film The Grifters.  Huston would go on to lose the Oscar for her Grifters performance to Kathy Bates.

7. Fay Bainter

Age at First Nomination: 45 (for those interested, Bullock was slightly older when she landed her first nomination by a few months and so would knock out Bainter if she were nominated again)
First Nominated Film: Bainter became the first actor nominated in two different acting categories in the same year, being cited for lead actress in White Banners and supporting in Jezebel in 1938.  She would go on to get a very late-in-her-career supporting nod for The Children's Hour in 1961.
Did She Win?: She did-Bainter set a longtime pattern of actors who were nominated for two different categories in the same year winning the supporting trophy, a trend that would last for fifty years until Sigourney Weaver broke it in 1988 (to this day she's the only actor to have been nominated twice in one year to have never won an Oscar, thanks to Julianne Moore's recent victory).
What Took So Long?: Like several women on this list, Bainter got her start and much of her success on the stage, appearing in a number of major New York productions before MGM finally convinced her to give film a try, and she became wildly successful pretty quickly.
Also Worth Noting: Back in the day, supporting actors would occasionally present the category they won the previous year, rather than the alternating genders we see today.  As a result, Bainter was the first person ever to present an Oscar to an African-American when she handed the statue to Hattie McDaniel for Gone with the Wind.

6. Thelma Ritter

Age at First Nomination: 48
First Nominated Film: Like most of her costars, Ritter scored a nomination for the classic 1950 film All About Eve, and followed that up with five supporting bids for The Mating Season (1951), With a Song in My Heart (1952), Pickup on South Street (1953), Pillow Talk (1959), and Birdman of Alcatraz (1962).
Did She Win?: Ritter is the most-nominated woman without a competitive Academy Award trophy to show for it, tied with Deborah Kerr and Glenn Close (though it's worth noting Kerr eventually got an honorary Oscar).  Despite the plethora of options, it's hard to tell if Ritter was actually ever close or just the female equivalent of Arthur Kennedy.
What Took So Long?: Ritter, though she was classically-trained, never really popped, working largely in radio and stock theater until she managed to have small parts three Best Picture nominees (Miracle on 34th Street, A Letter to Three Wives, and All About Eve), which brought her to the attention of casting directors.
Also Worth Noting: She was nearly able to make a fifth nomination in a row in 1954 for the classic Rear Window, which would have tied her with Greer Garson and Bette Davis for the most consecutive nominations.  Considering that she would have almost-certainly lost to Eva Marie Saint in On the Waterfront, perhaps the miss was for the best for a woman who said her many losses meant she "knew what it was like to be a bridesmaid, but never a bride."

5. Helen Mirren

Age at First Nomination: 49
First Nominated Film: Mirren scored a bit of a surprise nomination for The Madness of King George in 1994, but followed that with three expected citations for Gosford Park (2001), The Queen (2006), and The Last Station (2009).
Did She Win?: Mirren stampeded to basically every award known to mankind in 2006 with The Queen, a performance so noteworthy that she ended up winning a Tony for the same role nearly a decade later.
What Took So Long?: One of the most unexpected movie stars of the past decade, Mirren worked steadily in films in the 1980's, but almost always in character roles.  She also took frequent time off to do theater, and wasn't one of the Merchant-Ivory go-to's at the time, which probably hurt as that was what British actors were being cited for during the era.
Also Worth Noting: Mirren is well-known for her work as a monarch.  In her lifetime she's played 5 Queens: Elizabeth I, Elizabeth II, Queen Charlotte of Mexklenburg-Strelitz, Queen Gertrude (in Halmet), and the Queen of Egypt in The Prince of Egypt.

4. Gladys Cooper

Age at First Nomination: 54
First Nominated Film: Cooper's first nomination came for her nightmarish work in Now, Voyager (1942), and she earned two more supporting nods for The Song of Bernadette (1943) and My Fair Lady (1964).
Did She Win?: Cooper never pulled this off.  I wonder if she was pretty close for Song of Bernadette (it's a show-y part), but the other two seem unlikely.
What Took So Long?: Cooper spent much of her earlier career as one of the biggest theatrical draws of the 1930's, frequently finding herself headlining shows in the West End and on Broadway.  It wasn't until she moved to Hollywood in 1940 that she made her mark in film, and all things considered got on with Oscar pretty damn quickly.
Also Worth Noting: Is one of the rare actresses to have been nominated for the Tonys, Emmys, and Oscars without winning any of them.  Had she been nominated for a Grammy and lost, she would have joined Lynn Redgrave as the only person to have been nominated for all four awards and never won a trophy.

3. Judi Dench

Age at First Nomination: 63
First Nominated Film: Dench, like so many British actresses of a certain age before her, got in for playing a queen, in this case Victoria in Mrs. Brown.  She followed that turn with six more nominations for Shakespeare in Love (1998), Chocolat (2000), Iris (2001), Mrs. Henderson Presents (2005), Notes on a Scandal (2006), and Philomena (2013).
Did She Win?: She did, for Shakespeare in Love, the second-shortest performance ever to win an Academy Award after Beatrice Straight in Network.
What Took So Long?: Dench didn't really do film prior to her major breakout in Mrs. Brown, focusing principally on television and theater (she's in the Royal Shakespeare Company).  However, it is worth noting that she won a BAFTA eleven years prior to her turn in Mrs. Brown for the Oscar-blessed Room with a View.  Had her costar Maggie Smith stuck to lead like she did at the BAFTA's for the Oscars, Dench may well have gotten to Oscar eleven years earlier than expected (which still would have kept her on this list, for the record).
Also Worth Noting: Dame Judi has never been able to pull off an Emmy, perhaps the only major acting trophy she hasn't bagged, despite three nominations (for The Last of the Blonde Bombshells, Cranford, and Return to Cranford).  Dench nearly got a Razzie nomination for her bizarre appearance in The Chronicles of Riddick (she was on the shortlist), but the bizarre list of Britney Spears, Condoleezza Rice, Carmen Electra, Jennifer Lopez, and Sharon Stone kept her from such a dubious distinction.

2. Ethel Barrymore

Age at First Nomination: 65
First Nominated Film: The Grand Dame of the American Stage got her first Oscar nomination in None But the Lonely Heart in 1944, followed by The Spiral Staircase (1946), The Paradine Case (1947), and Pinky (1949).
Did She Win?: Yes, Barrymore won on her first try with None But the Lonely Heart.
What Took So Long?: Barrymore made a few silent films very early in her career, but largely stuck to the stage and was actually quite snobbish about the cinema, sticking to the theater and doing the likes of Shakespeare, Ibsen, and Maugham in the process.  She was bought by a major paycheck for None But the Lonely Heart, her first film in over a decade, and the acclaim that followed convinced her to stay in Hollywood.
Also Worth Noting: Barrymore turned down a marriage proposal from Winston Churchill because she thought he wasn't going anywhere.  That has nothing to do with movies or Oscars, but is a good anecdote so use it at your next dinner party.

1. Edith Evans

Age at First Nomination: 75
First Nominated Film: In the only year where three women were nominated in Supporting Actress for the same film, Evans joined her costars Diane Cilento and Joyce Redman in being nominated for Tom Jones (1963).  She followed that citation with nods for The Chalk Garden (1964) and The Whisperers (1967).
Did She Win?: No, Evans never won.  She likely came the closest in 1967 after picking up a number of precursors and getting numerous plaudits (she's superb in the largely forgotten film).  However, sentiment won the day and the inferior Guess Who's Coming to Dinner got Kate Hepburn her second trophy in the wake of Spencer Tracy's death.
What Took So Long?: Evans was one of the biggest names on the British stage, playing numerous Shakespearean roles and debuting roles in plays by the likes of Noel Coward and Bernard Shaw.  Though she dabbled in film, she didn't really take off until her small role in Tom Jones.  After that she stuck with film and gained a large amount of success during the 1960's and 1970's.
Also Worth Noting: Though she didn't win in 1963 (fellow dame Margaret Rutherford was successful), she did get to pick up Tony Richardson's Best Director award for him as he wasn't there.

It's worth noting before we go that Bullock isn't the only actress that is in contention for being included in this list (though she's the only one with a film that's an immediate threat).  Brenda Blethyn, Jacki Weaver, Catherine Keener, Viola Davis, and Melissa Leo also all are sitting at two nominations and would crack this Top 10 if they scored a third.  Do you think Bullock or any of these women will be able to go-the-distance and get a third nod?  Share your thoughts in the comments!

Everybody's Linking for the Weekend

It's Saturday, so let's get this link roundup on!!!!  Here are some of the stories I have been reading about this past week that I haven't had a chance to comment on (or perhaps you haven't even read about!):

On Entertainment...

Sandra Bullock

-I am going to be honest-it wasn't a hugely big week in entertainment this week.  One of the biggest stories I refuse to link to, which was the Sandra Bullock 911 call because I've had it with the media releasing 911 calls of famous people to the media.  It's wholly inappropriate to exploit the most personal moments of a person's life for entertainment, and quite frankly sites like TMZ are no better than the stalkers in many ways in providing the audio of the call, because they are exploiting Ms. Bullock's celebrity for their own personal benefit.  No one should have to worry about how they sound or what they are sharing on a phone call with 911-some lawmaker needs to make it illegal for these to leave a courtroom.

-The Huffington Post chronicles the fall of Grace of Monaco starring Nicole Kidman, and how it is moving to Lifetime.  The article addresses the cattiness about Kidman's "fallen star" and how that is what caused the film to fail, but they point out quite well that Jennifer Lawrence, arguably the biggest star on the planet right now, couldn't even get Serena to open wide thanks to horrid reviews.  For Kidman, this may end up being a best-case-scenario-she gets the film out of development hell, and despite the reviews there's a halfway decent chance her prestige still lands her an Emmy nomination.

-Kidman's Hours costar Julianne Moore, fresh off her recent Oscar win, is in negotiations to appear in Nicole Holofcener's new film about noted forger Lee Israel.  This is exciting for multiple reasons: there's of course the fact that Julianne Moore is getting cast in more prestige fare (between this and Freeheld, she's definitely not going the blockbuster route with her Oscar win, which is comforting since that's never been Juli's forte), and Nicole Holofcener's last film, Enough Said, gave us a wonderfully-felt performance from Julia Louis-Dreyfus.  Plus, I really like films about capers and forgers, so I'm likely buying a ticket even if the reviews are atrocious.

-Speaking of longtime hold-outs at an awards show, Kelli O'Hara's coronation as Best Actress at the Tony Awards continued this past week with Julie Andrews coming to see her in The King and I.  (Name drop time) I have actually met Dame Julie once, at an event for one of her children's books, and I have to say it was one of the most thrilling moments of my life.  I totally get even an actress as acclaimed as Kelli being flabbergasted on Twitter over the entire event.

On Politics...

Sen. Claire McCaskill (D-MO)

-Hillary is running for president.  No links needed-you already knew that.  We'll discuss more about her entrance into the race Tuesday on the blog.

-My personal favorite senator Claire McCaskill took issue with the way that the NCAA has turned into an NBA-tryout program rather than something that actually shows people who are going to graduate from college.  Like whenever any person says something remotely compelling on social media, McCaskill's comments were seen more as an indictment against Duke athletes, which is clearly not what she meant (and she has a point-the NBA is an insane opportunity, but should Duke and other schools really get to claim someone as an alumni when they don't actually ever graduate?).  In other news, the fallout from the recent suicides of Missouri State Auditor Tom Schweich and his spokesman have rattled the state's GOP and have some wondering if it may affect them at the ballot box next fall, when races for the Senate, governor,'s mansion, and White House will all be on the line.

-National Democrats and the DSCC continue be sour on the prospect of former Rep. Joe Sestak getting his anticipated rematch with Sen. Pat Toomey (R-PA), and it's starting to spill out into the public.  Chairman of Montgomery County Joshua Shapiro has been a rising star in the Keystone State for years now and it appears that he is the target of their push to get a preferred candidate in the race.  Considering its position as a swing state and that the Democrats have won the state's electoral votes for two decades, this is a crucial race for the Democrats and so this is risky, as Sestak may still win and be labeled "second choice" by the Republicans.  The DSCC is already having solid luck in Illinois, where this past week both Reps. Bill Foster and Cheri Bustos passed on the open Senate seat in favor of reelection, leaving only Rep. Robin Kelly (who is still undecided) standing between Rep. Tammy Duckworth and the nomination.

Shameless Self-Promotion of the Week...

Aaron Tveit reminds us that the Broadway Season is upon us...and sexy.

YouTube Video of the Week...

-My beloved Mamrie Hart, out pumping her book You Deserve a Drink, gets her Cyndi Lauper on in an epic way:

Just One More...

-Listen, I get that the name of the game on the internet is clicks, but do we really need yet another poll about Charles not deserving the throne after William?  Listen, I like Will and Kate better than Charlie and Camilla-everyone does.  But that doesn't mean that the man who has been in-line for the throne for sixty years really deserves to give up his right to the throne.  The days of Charles-hating have pretty much fallen by the wayside, in my opinion, and we should let the man have his likely very few years on the throne before William takes the throne (and by then we'll all be wishing it was George).  In other royal news, Prince Harry loathes selfies, and the internet's cumulative head explodes.

Could Jennifer Aniston Win an Oscar?

If there is one nomination slot that has me beyond intrigued for the upcoming awards season, it is the final slot in the Best Actress category for the Oscars.  We recently discussed my predictions in the category, but I think it's worth doing a bit of a deeper dive here, because there's so much that comes with this slot in terms of momentum.

This is because the four women that are currently predicted for a nomination have such huge debits when it comes to actually winning the trophy.  Reese Witherspoon has already won, and more importantly, has spent most of her time between nominations in celebrity wilderness, making flops and getting arrested.  Julianne Moore is who most people consider the frontrunner for the trophy, and that may well be, but Julianne Moore is in her 50's, and in the entire history of the Best Actress category, only one woman has won the Oscar while in her fifties (Shirley Booth, 1952's Best Actress), and her film isn't particularly large.  Rosamund Pike has a particularly large film in Gone Girl, but her character is deeply divisive and that could put a damper on her chances of actually winning.  And while on paper Felicity Jones seems about perfect for the trophy (traditional age to win, first-timer, British, beautiful-sorry, Oscar has a type, there's no denying it), her role borders on the supporting and this may just be a default nomination because Eddie Redmayne is going to win.  As a result of these four women not having emerged as a victor quite yet, the fifth nomination could be the key to actually winning the trophy, and as a result, I want to propose something: could Jennifer Aniston be this year's Best Actress?

Here me out here, as I'm sure many of you just rolled your eyes and said something snarky about any number of recently panned Aniston pics.  Yes, Aniston has not had a lot of critical success in the years since Friends went off the air.  Rachel Green is just a distant memory when you have The Bounty Hunter and The Switch blocking your view, but let's not forget that Aniston is one of the biggest box office draws in Hollywood.  Her films regularly pack in the theaters in a way that, say, Katherine Heigl, another constant subject of ire, never has been able to sustain.  She's also a wildly popular celebrity, regularly featured in the tabloids, and while cinephiles scoff at this fact, an enormous amount of the populace love her.  Whether it be residual Friends love, those who will always be Team Aniston, or those who find her chill California girl persona refreshing, Aniston has been able to capitalize on public goodwill in a major way that reminds me in a lot of ways of another recent Oscar-winner, Sandra Bullock.

Like Aniston, Bullock wandered through the wilderness a bit leading up to her Oscar.  Her popularity remained roughly in tact-people continued to like her as a celebrity, even if they didn't care for the movies that she produced.  Much like people want Aniston to still be Rachel Green, they wanted Bullock to be the charming girl we fell in love with in While You Were Sleeping and Miss Congeniality.  The thing was that Bullock's early Oscar buzz seemed more like a way to flatter a sliding star who seemed to have a populist hit on her hands than to actually stoke the flame with Oscar, but the idea caught on pretty quickly.  2009 was very similar to 2014 in that there didn't seem to be a robust lineup to fill the Best Actress race, and no one had quite emerged as a winner.  Meryl was up, but Meryl is always a contender and she can only fill one slot.  Gabourey Sidibe and Carey Mulligan seemed like surefire nominees, but both seemed so young and new to actually win the trophy.  And the rest?  Just look at the Globes lineup to see how lacking we were for actual competition that year.  AMPAS could have done an easy cop-out and just picked two British actresses (Helen Mirren and Emily Blunt) for bland costume dramas, but they didn't, and wanted to go with the major movie star who would have everyone in America clamoring for her to win an Oscar.  And then she did.

There are some parallels between the two campaigns that don't quite match up.  Most importantly, The Blind Side was a MASSIVE hit, kind of unparalleled in terms of box office, and there's no way on earth that Aniston's dark drama Cake will be able to compete with such a film.  Secondly, The Blind Side was released in November, while Cake was released in January, so there was more time for the general populace to discuss how Bullock was "due" and how much they loved her.  And of course, Bullock was willing to play the game, and I remain skeptical of whether Aniston is skilled enough in front of a podium to do this (though, to be fair, I was a little bit skeptical that Bullock would be able to do that as well).  The Best Actress winner is almost always someone who can find the right balance between self-deprecating, relatable, humbled, and still a little bit saucy in their speeches and TV appearances leading up to the ceremony.  Bullock did that with her "did I win this, or did I just wear you down?" style tactic, but Aniston has yet to show that sort of balance on the awards campaign trail (lest we forget, she was married to Brad Pitt the last time she won a major award).  However, if she can cultivate that persona, there's a lot of room this year.

That's because most of Aniston's competition could easily be vanquished if she actually is able to build on this momentum.  Emily Blunt is going to be upstaged by Meryl Streep in Into the Woods.  Shailene Woodley is incredibly young and in a teen movie.  Amy Adams is in a film that has no buzz, and is really only in contention because Amy Adams always is nominated for Oscars (if she ever started winning, she'd deserve comparisons to Meryl in this regard).  And Hilary Swank, probably Aniston's most formidable foe, is a two-time winner (not due) whose second trophy has a bit of a blemish on it in Oscar's memory (not everyone thinks it was a wise move in hindsight, which hurts dramatically-just ask Gwyneth Paltrow).  If Cake actually delivers the goods, this could happen.  I do wish from a pragmatic standpoint that they were releasing the film earlier, as the December qualifier has vanquished more potential contenders than it's actually helped (that this is a good idea is based on some random reality not based in fact), but Aniston is a big enough star that she alone can keep the film in contention.  In a few weeks we'll see if I'm all-knowing or whether I look like a fool, but I think that pundits underestimate Aniston's chances at their own peril.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Do you think Jennifer Aniston could be this year's stealth Best Actress winner, or at least one of the five nominees?  If not, who are your predictions, and what woman is going home with Oscar in February?  Discuss in the comments!

OVP: Actress (2013)

OVP: Best Actress (2013)

The Nominees Were...

Amy Adams, American Hustle

Cate Blanchett, Blue Jasmine

Sandra Bullock, Gravity

Judi Dench, Philomena

Meryl Streep, August: Osage County

My Thoughts: We are nearing the end of 2013 (appropriate, considering that it’s almost 2015), and that means that with just three categories left, we need to get into the women of the year, and boy did Oscar bring it.  We have four former winners and an actress enjoying her fifth nomination (but first for Best Actress).  Overall, it’s hard to deny that these are five  of the most important actresses of their generations, and quite frankly five of the most important actresses working in 2013, so it’s a particular treat to write about them (this is, it’s worth noting, the only category where I had tags already for all five women, so click below if you want to see my myriad thoughts and articles on these women). (I don’t normally throw a spoiler alert on OVP Write-ups, but I feel I get particularly spoiler-y in this list, so make sure to see these films before you get into the article, but bookmark it to read/comment later!)

Dame Judi Dench is a treasure of the cinema.  If you look at her filmic trajectory, it’s pretty much unprecedented for a woman to get her first Oscar nomination in her late sixties and then go on to score SEVEN more nominations in the next two decades.  It’s worth noting that Dame Judi, at least until Philomena, was able to get all of her nominations in back-to-back pairs-had she been nominated for Skyfall or Best Exotic Marigold Hotel last year (she got precursor love for both) that trend would have continued with Philomena.  Considering her last nomination was in 2006 we will be discussing her many more times in the OVP in the coming year or two (as you may have been able to tell from this past week, getting more of the OVP posts out the door and onto the site is a goal of mine in the coming months and throughout 2015, so hopefully you’re enjoying because they’re going to happen more often).

Dench’s work in Philomena is not what you’d consider her most challenging performance for the Oscars, but I don’t want that to be confused with bad.  Though she’s not getting her bizarrely wonderful turn in Notes on a Scandal on here, there’s more than just a dotty old woman journeying through the countryside.  I had a lot of problems with the script and plot of this movie, but Dench’s performance wasn’t one of them.  I love the way that she cultivates a very strong surface-level persona-this is a woman who spends so much time craving attention, but shunning it for certain aspects of her life.  The way that she constantly wants to share her inner-world is a textbook case of loneliness, and Dench never turns Philomena Lee into a fool-she’s always someone who is human, desperate for comfort, but very aware of the hypocrisy of the church that stole her child from her and the pain that she’s experienced as a result of this.

Cate Blanchett is also an actress who has made a giant splash in the same years as Dench (though she’s one nomination behind her Notes on a Scandal costar).  Her Jasmine is a triumph, and deserved the many plaudits that it received upon reception.  While the rest of the movie is not worthy of her work (in a similar way to Dench and Philomena), her performance shouldn’t be punished for that.  There’s a tremendous amount of being self-aware that Blanchett does in her acting, finding the tics that are starting to infiltrate Jasmine’s exterior, frequently finding the space between what Jasmine is oblivious toward and what Jasmine is smart enough to know but too self-aware to admit (compare her affair with Peter Sarsgaard and the surprise that it fell through to the constant drinking and putting upon her sister).  That she manages to pull off those final moments, giving us the dread of knowing that if she hasn’t become a mentally ill homeless person, she’s about to become one, it’s both comedy gold and petrifying for anyone in the audience (this could happen to you!)-Blanchett sells this for all its worth.

Meryl Streep is an actor that we’ve discussed quite frequently in these OVP write-ups (this is her third appearance), though we have a long way left with Ms. Streep (she’s been nominated fifteen more times so far, and I’m confident she’s not quite done yet).  Thankfully, Meryl is almost always awesome, and this is the case with August: Osage County.  This is clearly a part that other actors could have played (Jessica Chastain has a slight point, and we’ll get to that later today), but Meryl is the one who got the part and knocks Violet out of the park.  She knows how to land all of the jokes, consistently keeping her Violet competitive and winning even when she should be beat (those final moments with Barbara, when she’s metaphorically digging her own grave, but she still won’t relent even as her final daughter abandons her-it’s a killer piece of work).  I honestly have nothing bad to say about this performance except that she’s hampered down by a bad film and doesn’t have the benefit of universally great costars-only Margo Martindale is bringing it in the same fashion as Streep, and that means that Meryl occasionally feels out of place opposite Juliette Lewis and Julia Roberts (strong actors giving weaker work).

If there’s one woman who probably wanted this Oscar more than any of her fellow nominees, it was surely Amy Adams (you saw that in the Cate Blanchett speech, when Adams’ got particular respect paid to her despite being further down the totem pole than Meryl).  Adams has been trying with all of her might to win an Oscar while simply getting nominated (we’ve also profiled her three times now in the OVP), and this is definitely the closest she has gotten.  However, I don’t think it’s the closest she should have gotten, as this isn’t a piece of work that I’m particularly impressed by.  I do think that she outperforms Bale, but that’s not really saying much (clarification: it’s not saying anything).  Her Sydney is a complicated woman, and probably the sort of part that you’d be dying to play as an actress.  I liked her character decision to not give her an accurate British accent, but too many of her character choices seemed jumbled (particularly her weird attraction to Bale/lack of attraction to Cooper).  I also feel like she faded into the background too often whenever Jennifer Lawrence was onscreen, and while she’s never been sexier in appearance, her performance frequently forgot to capitalize on that whenever Rosalyn was a competitor.  Overall, a disappointing citation from an actress that has done much better.

We’ll end with Sandra Bullock, an actress we’ve also discussed previously, but the only one who doesn’t have a pre-2009 nomination left, so we’re not guaranteed to discuss her in an OVP again.  I was absolutely blown away by what Bullock was doing onscreen.  The casting director deserves some plaudits for choosing her for this role, as she manages to instill a sense of fear because she’s an “every-woman” that someone like Angelina Jolie wouldn’t have been able to accomplish.  There are scenes where she physically exhausts the audience by showing the constant struggle, and manages to own the movie for so many scenes and keeps us interested in her Ryan’s survival.  I love the way her bitterness to the world starts to spew out before the calm-how she says the things she clearly needs to be said before she might perish.  It’s a wonderful labor-of-love performance from an actress that is frequently underestimated.

Other Precursor Contenders: As was acknowledged with the leading men, the Globes separate their categories between Comedy/Musical and Drama.  And has was also acknowledged, they really need to be a little less prone to genre bias.  This is particularly true for Comedy/Musical where Amy Adams won, and beat Greta Gerwig (Frances Ha), Julia Louis-Dreyfus (Enough Said), Streep, and Julie Delpy (Before Midnight).  I would have given that trophy to Delpy, quite frankly, if it weren’t for the fact that that movie is CLEARLY a Drama, and that nomination should have gone to Bullock or Melissa McCarthy for The Heat (weird caveat-why can't Melissa McCarthy get a Golden Globe nomination-she's missed for Bridesmaids, The Heat, and Mike & Molly now-can someone explain a conspiracy theory here?).  The Drama category was a bit closer to their genre, with Blanchett trumping Bullock, Dench, Emma Thompson (Saving Mr. Banks), and Kate Winslet (Labor Day).  The SAG Awards went with close to a carbon copy of Oscar’s lineup (same winner), but substituted Emma Thompson in place of Amy Adams.  The BAFTA Awards also found a place for Thompson, skipping Meryl Streep (they aren’t as enamored with her as other awards bodies, though she does have a fair share of citations), though they went with the consensus on rewarding Cate Blanchett.

Actors I Would Have Nominated: This is actually a pretty strong list, all things considered (it’s easily the best acting lineup of 2013). That being said, I probably would have liked a little more attention given to ingenues Brie Larson in Short-Term 12 and Adele Exarchopolous in Blue is the Warmest Color.  I’m not going to chastise the Academy too much here though, as looking through those precursor contenders (with wonderful work that is already starting to feel classic like Louis-Dreyfus’s or Delpy’s), there were a lot of choices and only five slots last year.  The world is round, Hollywood-if you gave more parts to women, we would have years like this always!

Oscar’s Choice: Blanchett continued her domination and finally picked up her second trophy, and a lead one at that.

My Choice: I’ve been torn for weeks between Bullock and Blanchett.  I know the popular choice is to go with Blanchett, and that’s what I’m going to do, but I really loved what Bullock did with this part and I think she was vastly underestimated, but cannot quite compete with some of the insights and timing that Blanchett is able to pull off (Bullock had the better movie though).  Follow that with Streep, Dench, and Adams at the back.

Those are my thoughts-what are yours?  Anyone side against Blanchett (and if so-with whom?)?  Anyone wonder why we don’t have Best Actress fields like this all the time?  And who was your favorite lead actress of 2013?  Share in the comments!

Also in 2013: Actor, Supporting Actress, Supporting Actor, Original Screenplay, Adapted Screenplay, Foreign Language Film, Animated Feature Film, Live Action Short, Animated Short, Sound Mixing, Sound Editing, Original Score,  Original Song, Art Direction, Cinematography, Costume, Editing, Visual Effects, Makeup, Previously in 2013

Past Best Actress Contests: 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012