Usually around this time, the Supporting races don't look none too crowded. This year's especially exciting (or quiet, however you want to look at it) considering that this is the first year in a while without a heavy frontrunner (Waltz/Mo'Nique, Ledger/Cruz, Bardem, etc.).
Let's start with actress, just to do things a little differently.
Get ready to see a lot more of that eyebrow raise. Sony Picture Classics have ensured that Animal Kingdom is the first major FYC screener to be sent out to the doorsteps of Academy members so that they will have ample time to see it. I suspect that Jacki Weaver, pictured above, will perform one of the only critics sweeps (NY/LA/NSFC) of this season with this performance in the 96% rated flick and pushing her way to an easy nomination like Amy Adams in the past for the critically-aided Junebug. The film is small, however, and is not all that seen (no matter how much SPC wishes to change that). I see her getting in, but a win would be difficult.
1. Miranda Richardson - Made in Dagenham
2. Jacki Weaver - Animal Kingdom
3. Helena Bonham Carter - The King's Speech
4. Dianne Wiest - Rabbit Hole
5. Hailee Steinfeld - True Grit
6. Barbara Hershey - Black Swan
7. Kimberly Elise and/or Thandie Newton - For Colored Girls
8. Melissa Leo - The Fighter
I think Richardson, a two-time nominee, is someone that most Academy members will be old enough to remember and perhaps want to finally recognize for her strong film career. In a weak-ass year and an Academy-friendly film in the politically uplifting Made in Dagenham, this might just be a good opportunity to do so.
There is, of course, also Helena Bonham Carter, in probable frontrunner The King's Speech. She should ride a wave of love from the film and recognition from her name to a nomination, but reviews have never been all that strong for her compared to her co-stars and she's not likely to be in contention for the whole shebang.
Dianne Wiest is a respected character actress in a juicy role from a Tony/Pulitzer prize winning play. She's gotten good reviews and already has two Oscars to show for the industry's admiration of her (although, unlike those other two, this is not a Woody Allen movie). Hailee Steinfeld will need a bit of obvious category fraud to get into this category, but little girls can generally get away with it especially if the film is advertised as a Bridges vehicle, since there's no chance for her in a lead category. But she looks impressive enough in a very impressive trailer, and I think with [i]The King's Speech[/i] this film could be another three-nominee film (with Bridges and Damon).
Here's where we move into the 6-8 tier that I have a harder time seeing make it. Black Swan is very well reviewed and I believe it will have ecstatic supporters on its side. It has supporting actresses to offer in a weak race. However, the reviews for the supporting ladies, specifically, have not been as strong as say the film itself or Portman's performance. Between the two I think comeback veteran Barbara Hershey would have the best chance at a nomination for her "evil mother" performance a la Mo'Nique. But for someone with as little buzz as either her or Kunis (despite her prize at Venice), I think the film would need more support for either of them to make it in the way Helena Bonham Carter will be aided by her film's general enthusiasm. There are two other films that potentially have Supporting duos to offer in nominations that are big question marks right now. For Colored Girls and The Fighter both appear to be Oscar bait, both by filmmakers who are almost rather reviled in Hollywood. Tyler Perry tries his hand at the Oscar game after seeing the kind of urban fare the Academy could go for with last year's success of Precious, he adapts a very challenging play into a film with an all-star black cast. David O. Russell takes on the often-nominated boxing drama — filled with strippers, drug addicts, and bitchy moms (Melissa Leo's part being the one I find more likely than Amy Adams' stripper) in every attempt to almost punch its Oscar radar. The most we have at this point from either of them are trailers, in my opinion with For Colored Girls looking far stronger (though perhaps melodramatic) compared to the schmaltz and desperation The Fighter's trailer reeks of.
As for Supporting Actor, we have a field that looks more crowded but is still just as unsure how it's going to play out.
Here's how I'd rank the field of 8 likely contenders:
1. Geoffrey Rush - The King's Speech
2. Andrew Garfield - The Social Network
3. Mark Ruffalo - The Kids Are All Right
4. Christian Bale - The Fighter
5. Matt Damon - True Grit
6. Sam Rockwell - Conviction
7. Ed Harris - The Way Back
8. Justin Timberlake - The Social Network
Not much to say, here. Geoffrey Rush is considered just as good if not better than Colin Firth in their Best Picture hopeful, but we'll see if the Academy is eager to throw another Oscar at his feet (to me he seems esteemed enough to end his career boasting more Oscars than the one he already has). I'm championing Andrew Garfield but I'm not alone; the kid's turned into something of a superstar after The Social Network and he seems to be a big part of why people are beginning to anticipate the new Spider-Man movie he'll headline. But he's just starting to become recognizable to people, and many might see it as a bit too soon. Mark Ruffalo is a respected actor, yet to be nominated, in a film that won't win Best Picture but is likely to be nominated for one. Recap: so far we have one Oscar winner who probably doesn't need another win, an unnominated actor who doesn't need a win yet and then an unnominated actor that people just want to see damn nominated. We'll see how it goes but so far I'd say that all three are in fair contention to win it all.
Then we get to murkier territory. As I said, we're very unsure about The Fighter unlike the men of the first three films I've ranked, but even if it falls in flames I do think people are eager to give Christian Bale his first Oscar nomination seeing as though this is his first chance since people started caring about him to get an Oscar nomination. He plays a drug addict and looks really over the top in the trailer (I'm just not a big fan of his, sorry), and though he has a reputation in Hollywood I do think he's just populist enough to have enough #1 votes for a nomination. Win? Right now I wouldn't say so, but there are enough precursor opportunities that I can see him taking (starting with the NBR) that would put him in conversation for it.
Matt Damon has the benefit of having two films that will have some fans, though I think True Grit will be far less divisive than Hereafter is proving to be (despite having some vocal fans). Plus, his futile lead campaign for the latter would help him in a general sense of obligation to throw him one this year (like last year when his Invictus mention seemed also helped by his lead performance in The Informant!
Sam Rockwell has a feeling of being due similar to Bale and Ruffalo, but he's not yet as well known as they are, and his films' reviews are rather flat (though his generally sing praises). He's definitely in conversation for it, though, especially if the Academy buys its sap more than critics have been.
The last two options are very different on the surface level but face similar problems. Ed Harris is a well respected veteran character actor who has four unsuccessful Oscar nominations. He's in a film that may or may not get Academy love but he faces internal competition from other actors in his film, some (Colin Farrell) even receiving stronger notices in the few reviews there are for the film. Justin Timberlake is not a professional actor whatsoever, though a superstar in his own right (more than Harris, anyways). Some feel like he steals the show in his likelier Best Picture contender, The Social Network, but he faces heavy internal competition from a more sympathetic Andrew Garfield and a fascinating performance by Armie Hammer (also being campaigned in this race).
No comments:
Post a Comment