Best Actress: Post-BFCA/SAG/GG, 2

[with_one_voice]

J.Law is the frontrunner. It's like having Meg Ryan as the frontrunner for You Got Mail.

It's weak.

1) your perception that her performance is weak (which I actually agree with) counters the overwhelming consensus, both of critics, of ADers, and of the public
2) you're taking only 1 (the frontrunner) of the 7-8 contenders and using that as an indication of the entire field. That's like saying the 2010 field was weak b/c Natalie Portman (the frontrunner)'s performance sucked. Even if you think the performance of the actress who wins was bad, that has nothing to do w/ the rest of the field.
3) in Blasty's response, he didn't say anything about the actual merit of the performances; he just elaborated on the fact that he finds this year more boring than last year b/c of the actresses involved, which is completely different from saying it's weak, which was the entire point of the text you quoted

I actually think both, but I don't care enough about the point that it's weaker to continue arguing about that anymore - again because this race is so blah to me.

Okay, well I'd be curious to hear why you think it's weaker (if you want to elaborate).

[Blasty]

From the Hollywood perspective, it's weak, which is nothing new. Most of the contenders come from across the pond and are either foreign in locale or language. For Hollywood movies, the category is a disaster. Or to put a finer point on it, for American Hollywood contenders the race sucks.

[Souler]

From the Hollywood perspective, it's weak, which is nothing new. Most of the contenders come from across the pond and are either foreign in locale or language. For Hollywood movies, the category is a disaster. Or to put a finer point on it, for American Hollywood contenders the race sucks.

There's two actresses in top five BP contenders, which is pretty much the maximum for this category. That alone makes it comparatively (though not overall, yeah) strong.

[MVP of West Hollywood]

The door is wide open for Watts IMO

[homespun]

J.Law's performance isn't exactly "weak". It's just basic. There is almost zero degree of difficulty. She basically has to be cute, sexy and flustered like 99% of rom-com heroines.

Whatever you ultimately think of Portman's performance in Black Swan, it's incredibly easy to see why the degree of difficulty involved in the performance merited oscar frontrunner status. J.Law is just baffling.

The rest of the field feels cobbled together. A child performance, two foreign language performances that would likely be ignored if there were enough strong English language contenders, and Nanny Watts doing her usual "misery porn" performance that tends to get ignored in stronger years. And the last minute entry in Chastain.

[RobYo]

The door is wide open for Watts IMO

it really is. Lawrence and Chastain are all hype but the performances themselves do not merit front-runner status. it's mainly because people love their movies as a whole more.

[MVP of West Hollywood]

There are straight men in this forum?

I am a straight male, although I am in the conversation for "gayest" straight males, being into stuff like pop music, musicals and generally liking females more than males.

[Donezo]

I'm sorry........when did Naomi Watts become a contender for the win???

[Moviefreak]

The door is wide open for Watts IMO

The only thing it's wide open for is for her to sneak into the Dolby Theater with Sunday Rose's stroller.

[with_one_voice]

From the Hollywood perspective, it's weak, which is nothing new. Most of the contenders come from across the pond and are either foreign in locale or language. For Hollywood movies, the category is a disaster. Or to put a finer point on it, for American Hollywood contenders the race sucks.

OK. Obviously everyone has their own subjective opinion of films/performances, hence what makes them art. One thing is for sure, though, which is that the films of the Best Actress contenders this year are much, much, much better than those of last year, and even if that is not an exact statement about the lead actress performances in them, there's a generally good correlation between the two, since praise for a leading performance and overall praise for a film tend to, more often than not, go hand in hand. I mean, someone could think Crash is the greatest Best Picture winner of all time, but that's very different from what the actual consensus is going to be, so that's just my point, that this year is actually going to be remember as a highlight for Actresses (as I think it is, too).

For example, ZDT, Amour, Beasts, SLP -- 4 films with Best Actress contenders in the race (well, I'm being lenient on Riva here lol) -- are 4 of the 10 highest-ranked films on critics top 10 lists this year, and you can bet those rankings have a lot to do with the performances of the lead actresses in them (Chastain, Riva, Wallis, Lawrence). Last year was an utter train wreck, and none of those films are or will be held in much high esteem down the road, so even if one thinks Streep or Davis or whomever was amazing, it's likely that it's not going to be remembered as much more than a strong actress performance in an otherwise eh film. It's hard to assess years based on performances, because we don't actually have quantified ratings for performances, which is why the rating of a film as a whole is generally a helpful indicator of the lead performance in it. Of the Best Actress films last year, in contrast to this one, only 1 of the actress's films ranked in the top 20 films of the year (TGWTDT, at no. 19) according to critics top 10 lists, and that same film is the only one to score above a 70 on Metacritic (and just barely: 71).

This year, we have a 95 for ZDT, 81 for SLP, 86 for Beasts. When the worst of the likely nominees is looking like it's going to be Cotillard and Watts, films with a 74 and 76 on Metacritic, respectively, I don't really see the argument that this year is weak, especially relative to the mess that was last year. But to each his own; I have no idea which performances you've seen

[Moviefreak]

I'm sorry........when did Naomi Watts become a contender for the win???

I've been asking myself this same question for like two days now. Completely baffling.

[Blasty]

I'm sorry........when did Naomi Watts become a contender for the win???

This reminds me last year when there was a brief time, sight unseen, we wondered if Glenn Close could butler her way to a win for Nobbs! It's so much more fun imagining that and imagining Glenn imagining that than....watching Nanny do the breaststroke towards the Oscars.

[Souler]

People like to make these races seem more exciting than they are - even though, in this case, it actually is somewhat exciting without constructing an argument for an also-ran to win.

[MVP of West Hollywood]

Ehhh...are you sure you actually know any straight men? Or do you just have some stereotypical view of what straight men are supposed to "like". Any blonde with a pretty face will do, I guess. If you want to overcompensate for something. I don't know many straight men who worship at the altar of Naomi Watts. No one would kick her out of bed, that's for sure, but she's not Scarlett Johansson (now there's a memorable blonde) or Nicole Scherzinger on the sex appeal scale, know what I mean.

Cate Blanchett is more memorable, imho. You don't have to be straight or gay to acknowledge that she has an...um..."interesting" face. Same goes for Tilda Swinton (they could almost be cousins). I don't think Blanchett is "hot" or "sexy" or any of that nonsense. But visually, in terms of seeing a face on a movie screen, she's distinct. But I am a movie buff and I pay attention to this shit.

I think you are underestimating Watts' appeal to straight men. I've seen her in a lot of 'hot chick' signatures and avatars around the web over the years. She's legit hot. Other than Life Aquatic I've never found Cate "hot". And Tilda, LOL, no

[homespun]

People like to make these races seem more exciting than they are - even though, in this case, it actually is somewhat exciting without constructing an argument for an also-ran to win.

Yeah. Until I see some real evidence of Watts making a surge, she's still just there as a filler nod and it's going down to Chastain and Lawrence (both of whom will easily win the Globes).

[Howard Beale's Toothpaste]

Actress is only weak in terms of prestige Oscar bait. Look absolutely anywhere outside that tiny, narrow realm, and it becomes rich and full of life.

[Jonathan]

Wait, people think Watts has a chance at winning this? A 43-year-old in a movie likely to receive no other major nominations (Or any, for that matter)? Over two hot actresses (Career-wise, though they're certainly good-looking) in major Picture nominees?

[homespun]

Wait, people think Watts has a chance at winning this? A 43-year-old in a movie likely to receive no other major nominations (Or any, for that matter)? Over two hot actresses (Career-wise, though they're certainly good-looking) in major Picture nominees?

Maybe it was Reese Witherspon's vile letter that got people carried away.

[francesco-natale]

Actress is only weak in terms of prestige Oscar bait. Look absolutely anywhere outside that tiny, narrow realm, and it becomes rich and full of life.

That's a defintive proof you are straight ...

I'm agree with everyone : this year is perfectly respectable but from a oscarbait point of view it's quite boring ... the only "classik" contender being Helen Mirren and she is currently under Wallis in the poll.

[babz]

From the Hollywood perspective, it's weak, which is nothing new. Most of the contenders come from across the pond and are either foreign in locale or language. For Hollywood movies, the category is a disaster. Or to put a finer point on it, for American Hollywood contenders the race sucks.

So basically you only want american or established stars in the race. That is more boring to me. Thank god there is two foreign actresses in contention instead of Meryl for the 100th time, now if only Mirren would go away too.