For anyone reading the title of this week's post and thinking that 1) the year is wrong, and 2) this series was released before last week's choice of Sharp Objects, hold your horses. Yes, The Assassination of Gianni Versace: American Crime Story was indeed released on HBO a few months prior to Sharp Objects. But as I have done with other selections in this and my lead recasting projects, if there are two projects from the same year that I want to choose, I often place first the one that was filmed first. In this case, it was Sharp Objects, hence Versace coming afterward.
Based on real events, this miniseries follows the life of Andrew Cunanan (played by Darren Criss), who ended a three-month killing spree with the murder of famous Italian fashion designer Gianni Versace, his fifth victim. Cunanan's third victim was real estate tycoon, Lee Miglin. Miglin was a closeted gay man who had met the much younger Cunanan, who was an escort at the time, at a party. It is Miglin's wife, Marilyn, whom I have chosen to recast in this production. Brilliantly portrayed by Judith Light, Marilyn, a long-time host on the Home Shopping Network, came back from a business trip to their home in Chicago in 1997 to find her husband murdered. It's the aftermath of this discovery and the sort of mental hoops the character goes through when dealing with police and the press that make for a fascinating opportunity for any actor.
This would be such a great character to unpack. If you've seen the entire episode (Marilyn basically has one episode of the nine in which she's prominently featured, as well as a small amount at the end), you get a feeling that Marilyn may have suspicions about her husband's sexuality, without it being directly acknowledged. She insists after Lee's death that it be portrayed as a random killing in the press. This likely became next to impossible to maintain the more the country and the world learned about Cunanan and the nature of his crimes. Light does an amazing job in the role. It's one of those tricky scenarios where the actor has to portray someone who's basically pretending within the role as well. Marilyn puts up quite the front on her shopping network, and seems to sort of hide behind the cover of her work, perhaps to not have to deal with the reality of not only her loss, but the fact that she'd been married to someone for over forty years without fully knowing them. Of course there's some creative license in all this, as we don't know for sure what Marilyn knew about her husband. Regardless, it's a tale as old as time, where the seemingly deceived wife (or husband) has to struggle to not beat themselves up for not realizing the truth. It's easy to see how denial is a natural rabbit hole to go down.
I've watched this series twice, and it still kind of boggles my mind that the first killings took place so close to where I grew up. I have vague memories of the news of Cunanan, but the first four murders were sort of lost in the background (I was 17 at the time) of his extremely high-profile final victim. Watching the backstory of his first two victims, Jeffrey Trail and Davis Madson, it's wild and sad the extent to which gay men had to be fearful of being outed in their lives (understandably, particularly in the military) less than thirty years ago.
The series was very well-received by critics, currently holding an 88% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 74 on Metacritic. Six actors were nominated for Primetime Emmy awards for their performances, including Light (along with Edgar Ramírez as Versace, Penélope Cruz as his sister Donatella, Ricky Martin as Versace's partner Antonio D'Amico, and Finn Wittrock as Trail). Criss deservedly won for his lead performance, while Ryan Murphy (at his best in this series in my opinion) earned a win for directing the show's premiere episode.
This selection was both easy and tough at the same time. Way back in 2012, I posted a Wish List entry where I suggested how fun it would be to see Meryl star in a feature film about the Russian empress, Catherine the Great. I've long been fascinated by the political changes that swept Western civilization in the latter half of the 18th century. The French Revolution, the United States winning its independence from Britain's mad king George III. And of course, Russia emerging as a modern European power. The Age of Enlightenment brought forth incredible advances in free thought, scientific discovery, and the separation of church and state. Important stuff in my view.
After 2005's Elizabeth I, Nigel Williams was apparently interested in writing another limited series for Helen Mirren. The latter of the two would focus on the powerful, and historically maligned, Catherine II. On the surface, one might think it's just another costume drama involving a royal court. I admit, there are definite similarities when comparing Mirren's roles of Elizabeth and Catherine. But as Mirren herself has said in interviews, they're very different personalities, and their reigns took place two centuries apart. Elizabeth's character showed extremes of joy, jealousy and rage. Catherine, while no stranger to strong emotion, seemed to rule a bit more with her head than her heart. With it, she held enormous power in Russia. It's such an interesting paradox, this idea of what I've read termed 'enlightened despotism.' Catherine had usurped her husband's throne after orchestrating his death. And despite all her progressive interests and education, she ruled as an absolute monarch.
The four-part HBO series starts when Catherine is supposed to be around 35, not long after she assumed control of the throne. Obviously that's a bit of a stretch for Mirren (or Meryl), but we sort of forget about that with depictions of people from so long ago. I've actually watched the series twice at this point. In my more recent viewing, I enjoyed it more than I remembered. I had such high hopes for a project featuring Catherine the Great that I was initially disappointed in my first viewing by what felt like a truncated telling of her last two decades of rule. I feel like the project could've been better served by an additional one to two episodes. There's so much to cover. The Russo-Turkish wars, the annexation of Crimea, the volatile relationship she has with her son regarding the question of succession. And of course, her many male suitors. Mirren comments in a separate interview how one of her goals in taking on this role was to help reshape Catherine's legacy. There's a stench of misogyny in many historians' accounts of Catherine, particularly in regard to the fact she was known to enjoy sex. Imagine that. And no, she never fucked a horse.
One of the main differences I notice between this series and Elizabeth I is the production value. The scenes, cinematography, and costumes are all stunning and expensive-looking. While perhaps a bit dark, we get a good feel for the northern climate and dimness of imperial palaces. A large arc of Catherine's character involves her relationship with Grigory Potemkin, finely played by Jason Clarke. The relationship was a tumultuous one, as there was this constant sense of dissatisfaction on Potemkin's part over not ever really being able to hold the power he envied in Catherine, and her clear reminders that any of his successes are only because of her.
Helen Mirren is a brilliant actor. But I struggle to get a good sense of the passage of time as it pertains to her portrayal, aside from the increased grey we see in her hair. Only toward the very end do we see a sad, paranoid change in the empress, even to the point that she overseas the burning of books that espouse ideas that may threaten her power. There's also the question of language. Much like The Last Station, this is a period piece that takes place in Russia, where most, if not all the actors speak with a British accent. I understand it's not reasonable to shoot the whole thing with the cast speaking Russian or French or German. But I still wonder how that question may have been handled if Meryl had been in the lead role. I think it may have helped the whole production feel a little less like it was produced by the BBC.
Critical reception was decent. The series holds a 68% on Rotten Tomatoes and score of 61 on Metacritic, indicating "generally favorable" reviews. The writing isn't exactly inspired, but the acting and set design make it worth the watch. Mirren managed to score a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress in a Miniseries or TV Film. The award that year went to a very deserving Michelle Williams in Fosse/Verdon.
Catherine the Great was a complex woman ruling a large country in a rapidly changing world. It's a shame some of the intrigue of her life is dampened by the imperfections of this series. But I think it's still worth the watch. Can't believe we're already coming around to the final selection of this project next week!
The first time I saw The Wife in the fall of 2018, I came away pleasantly surprised. Buzz had been swirling around Glenn Close since the film premiered at the Tonto Film Festival a year earlier. I know there are a lot of people who don't think her performance or the role itself was all that special. But I happen to be a huge fan of both Close's performance and the film, and would've loved to see Meryl interpret the character of Joan Castleman.
Jonathan Pryce plays the "the husband," Joe Castleman, who's recently been awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature. Joan's not exactly thrilled about it, because at it turns out, she's the one who's actually written all of Joe's books over the years. We get flashbacks to the late 50s, when Joan was a student in one of Joe's classes. When he receives criticism for the quality of his novel, Joan ends of editing it, turning it to a best-seller. And so it went for the Castlemens over the years, all leading up to their trip to Stockholm for Joe's acceptance of a prize that should've gone to his wife.
That would be such a great scene to play. I expect anyone in this role would have their work cut out for them in regard to how much emotion they have to hold back. From the beginning, Joan is in a strange spot. Yes, there is excitement about the honor her husband is getting, and maybe even a sense of some validation in knowing that the work--mostly of her doing--is getting recognized on such a large stage. Then there's the resentment one would no doubt experience in having to watch someone else get all the credit. We get a sense of that building as the film progresses.
Christian Slater plays biographer Nathaniel Bone, who travels to Stockholm in an attempt to get some inside info on Joe. He reveals to Joan over drinks and cigarettes that he suspects that she has indeed been the real creator of Joe's very successful string of novels. In this scene as well, it's a fine line Joan walks. She considers Nathaniel an opportunistic pest, and denies his suggestions. But at the same time, one can't help but get a sense that she likes the fact that someone might understand she's the real literary genius, not her adulterous husband.
Of course, all these pent up feelings end up coming out in the film's climax, where Joan and Joe have it out back in their hotel room. This feels like the definition of an Oscar clip:
That left eye blink at 0:26 is pretty wild. This is great stuff from Close. She scored both Golden Globe and SAG wins for her performance, and was the odd-on favorite to take home her first Oscar statuette on her seventh nomination. Olivia Colman captured the gold that night for her splendid performance as Queen Anne in The Favourite. Hers was probably the only performance I was OK with triumphing over a long-overdue Glenn.
Critic responses to the film were favorable, with it holding a very solid 86% on Rotten Tomatoes and a 77 score on Metacritic. It's actually the kind of movie I can watch multiple times. I love the cozy feel surrounding the Nobel ceremony festivities, and the acting is world class. I'm still bummed that Close wasn't able to come away with a win for this. It's a wonderful, challenging role. Maybe it just paves the way for her to finally win the big one if she can manage to scrape together the funding for Sunset Boulevard.
This one was sort of a no-brainer. All the way back in 2014 when I posted my full Reimagined Filmography, I had wondered if there was a chance for Meryl to star alongside Susan Sarandon in the blacklisted script, Best Actress. Three years later, the story was expanded into an eight-episode series on FX. I added it to my Shoulda Coulda Wouldas tag in 2019, which at the time, I had thought would serve as my list of films to somehow try to go back and insert into the aforementioned reimagined history. I've already covered in an earlier post how the shear number of films in consideration became too much, sparking this new project.
Ryan Murphy apparently had Jessica Lange in mind to star opposite Sarandon early on. Lange had enjoyed enormous success following her starring roles in the first four seasons of American Horror Story. The role of Joan Crawford may not have seemed like the meatier part when held up to the larger-than-life character of Bette Davis. But I'd argue that Lange got to explore a wider range of emotions in trying to work out someone as complex and tragic as Crawford.
The story follows Crawford and Davis in the early 1960s, whereby that point, the two are basically has-beens in the film industry (they were in their mid 50s btw). Crawford aimed desperately for returning to the spotlight. Davis did too, in a way, but more from an aspect of just wanting to have good parts to play for the sake of the work itself. While the two were not huge fans of each other, Crawford understood that the only way she was going to get Warner Brothers to allow director Robert Aldrich to make Whatever Happened to Baby Jane? was if they had Bette Davis attached as well. Crawford was savvy that way, even if it may have singed the very fiber of her being to have to concede the necessity of doing so. The picture got made and was a huge box office success. But it did not result in a deluge of new offers afterward, and Davis got the majority of the critics' praise for her performance.
Aside from it making me want to smoke really bad, I think this may be my favorite scene of the entire series. We get a glimpse into the depravity of Crawford's childhood. In a way, it almost seems obvious that she would grow into a domineering mother whose insatiable quest for attention and validation only drives her to drink, and drives those she loves away. Kudos to Lange for her portrayal here. I think Meryl would have her work cut out for her to convey the kind of ruthless sophistication Lange manages to imbue into the role. I wish I could think of a better antonym for naive, because I'd use it to describe this character.
What's so nice about expanding this story beyond the making of Baby Jane is that we get to see the aftermath of these two women far beyond the time they spent together on set--although that's some of the best stuff. This clip is an interesting example of how these two women were essentially stars for slightly different reasons. Crawford much for her beauty, Davis for her talent. While I think Meryl happens to be gorgeous, she's not necessarily considered conventionally "pretty" by Hollywood standards. She knows it, and has used it to her advantage, not unlike Davis. Lange, as an actress, has certainly had more opportunities beyond the age of fifty than Crawford did. But Jessica, too, has historically been cast in roles that have often had at least an oblique connection to her sex appeal. It would be fun to see Meryl in that role in Feud.
The series was a great critical success for FX. It holds a 91% on Rotten Tomatoes and 81 on Metacritic, the latter of which is an supposed to be an indication of "universal acclaim." It received eighteen Emmy nominations, including for its two amazing leads. Sarandon and Lange were also both nominated for a Golden Globe (RIP) and SAG awards. Deservedly, supporting players Judy Davis, Jackie Hoffman, Alfred Molina, and Stanley Tucci were each recognized with multiple nominations as well.
Feud was originally meant to be an anthology series, with the first season more accurately titled Feud: Bette and Joan. The second series was going to follow the lives of Prince Charles and Princess Diana, but was scrapped before filming began. I wonder if after the success of Netflix's The Crown, FX thought the market would've been a bit too saturated with royals for their second season to be a hit. I, for one, kind of like that Feud: Bette and Joan stands alone.
Meryl Streep first met Spanish director Pedro Almodóvar on the awards circuit in 2003. Streep was getting regularly recognized for her work in The Hours and Adaptation, and Almodóvar for his film, Talk to Her. After Alice Munro's book of short stories, Runaway, was released in 2004, Almodóvar reached out to Streep about teaming up to make a film adaptation. In its original form, what we today know as Julieta was to be entitled Silence, with Streep playing the same character at ages 20, 40, and 60. Meryl would've been in her mid to late fifties by the time filming was to take place. Almodóvar recognized the creative license he would be taking by having one actor portray such a broad spectrum of ages, but he's been quoted as saying, "She deserves to be playing the three characters. With her, I wanted to make something Ingmar Bergman-like being Meryl. We know she can do every accent, and I think she can act every age too." That's quite the compliment from such an accomplished filmmaker.
Alas, Almodóvar reportedly never quite felt confident enough in his English, nor American culture, to do the script justice. He put off making the film until 2015, and when he did, he set it in Madrid and cast Spanish-speaking actors. He later claimed he felt bad for not telling Meryl beforehand. Almodóvar has since made his English language debut with 2020's short film, The Human Voice, starring Tilda Swinton.
But what if Almodóvar had, by 2015, felt ready to direct in English? And what if he'd still wanted Streep in the film, despite the script being different from what the two had intended ten years prior? All this sounds more akin to how I mull over my "Reimagined" filmography choices for Meryl, but I'm making an exception for this project, as I don't ever picture her being a reasonable replacement for the current version of Julieta. Were the script to be similar in regard the characters' life events, just set in the United States, for example, there might've been a window of opportunity for these two greats to have finally joined forces.
So...on to the movie. Almodóvar adapted three of Munro's short stories to form the screenplay. Julieta (in English it would've been Juliet) is about to move to Portugal with her boyfriend. But after she runs into a friend of her estranged daughter's (Antía, with whom we later learn shared a romantic relationship with the friend Julieta runs into), Julieta decides to stay in Madrid, renting an apartment in the same building she raised Antía. Julieta writes a journal detailing how she met Antía's father, Xoan, their relationship, his infidelity and death, and her experience of her daughter cutting her out of her life and attempts at reconnecting.
Now to the casting. Not unlike my thoughts on my recent recasting choice of The Debt, having some resemblance in actors for roles that are supposed to be the same person is a big deal to me. Jennifer Ehle is a spitting image of Meryl at a younger age, and has the chops to handle the younger version of Juliet.
Ehle and Streep are obviously older than Adriana Ugarte and Emma Suárez (the junior and senior versions of Julieta, respectively). At the same time, I don't think it's wildly unreasonable to have Juliet be, say 30, instead of 25 at the start of the flashback. She ages some fifteen years over the course of her arc, and Ehle would in that respect be totally passable for the character, as would Meryl--the two are almost exactly twenty years apart in age.
Again, as it pertains to a lead character, Meryl's role size would be similar to aforementioned films like One True Thing, The Devil Wears Prada, Julie & Julia, and August: Osage County (not to mention recasting selections like Fried Green Tomatoes and The Debt). They're borderline, or for other actresses, perhaps easily supporting roles. But for a performer of Streep's pedigree, it garners top billing and a lead push for awards.
Julieta made many top ten lists in the United States for Best Foreign Language film. It was nominated for the Palme d'Or at Cannes, and holds an 83% on Rotten Tomatoes and a score of 73 on Metacritic, both markers of strong critical support. Suárez had quite the year at the Goya Awards (Spain's national annual film awards), winning Best Actress for Julieta AND Best Supporting Actress for La Propera Pell (The Next Skin). I guess the idea of Meryl going lead for this role wouldn't have been that big of a stretch after all.
I can remember leading up to Oscar season in 2015, Sally Field was an early awards contender for her performance in Hello, My Name is Doris. It seemed the type of role and performance that would, at the very least, score her a Golden Globe nomination. I still scratch my head a bit when I look back and think about how the best Field was able to manage was a Critics' Choice nomination.
Meryl might have fared better. I say that with all due respect to Field. It was a wonderful performance and deserved more recognition, in my opinion. Ultimately, and unfortunately, I just don't think the movie was seen by enough people. Field portrays Doris Miller, a 60-something woman from Staten Island who works in a mid-level office job. She's lived with her recently passed mother her whole life, and Doris finds herself alone in a home packed to the gills with decades of hoarded memories. When a handsome young co-worker, John, (Max Greenfield) sparks an infatuation in Doris, she finds the resolve--with a little influence from a lame self-help guru and a friend's teenage granddaughter--to make a play for him.
The film is funny and awkward and touching all at once. I watched it again this weekend, and for whatever reason I had sort of forgotten the stuff about Doris being a hoarder. It's a fascinating and often tragic compulsion for many. I'm not a psychotherapist, but from what I understand, it's typically observed in individuals who have other diagnosable disorders. Doris is what many people would call eccentric; she dresses sort of quirky, has a few behavioral idiosyncrasies, and is so outdated in her sense of the world that she seems retro hip to John's very "current" friends. She's likely got depression--in part due to a broken engagement she endured at a young age to stay with her mother, and the life deferred in caring for her til the end. There are a lot of interesting layers Meryl would've been able to unfold in all that. And it's a character Streep has definitely not played before. I found it interesting that in an interview, Sally Field summed up the story as "a coming of age, of a person of age." Well put.
Quick sidebar: One of the more enjoyable aspects of the film for me are the scenes with the great Tyne Daly, who plays Doris's close friend, Roz. Daly gets some of the funnier one-liners. And Roz's devotion to her friend, despite seeing her going down a path that seems destined to only hurt her, provides some welcome tender moments.
Field, as mentioned, earned terrific reviews. The fact that the film holds an 85% on Rotten Tomatoes makes it even more perplexing that she wasn't able to garner more traction for awards attention. On its meager budget of only $1 million (a total that probably would've grown by 5-10 times had Streep been involved), the film took in around $14 million at the box office. Not exactly peanuts considering its low profile. I think it would've been a great summer release for Meryl, similar to Julie & Julia, Hope Springs, Ricki and the Flash, and Florence Foster Jenkins.
Julianne Moore's performance in 2014's Still Alice was one of the most lauded of the decade. She pretty much swept all film awards, including the Big Four: Oscar, BAFTA, Golden Globe, and SAG. And yet, there was another screen performance that year that was arguably just as praised and awarded. Frances McDormand's role in the HBO limited series Olive Kitteridge was an acting powerhouse, and would've been an incredible character to watch Meryl interpret.
Adapted from Elizabeth Strout's Pulitzer-Prize winning novel of the same name, the four-part series takes us on a 25-year journey through Olive's life, and her struggles with depression, marriage, motherhood, and friendship. I think it's fair to characterize her as a bit of a misanthrope. She detests sentiment and will not suffer fools. But Olive has more depth to her than that. I found this particularly noticeable in the relationship with her husband. The old adage of "opposites attract" is not all that accurate in my opinion. I think people who are similar to each other tend to end up together. In the case of Olive and Henry (Richard Jenkins), they both actually share very similar values. Hard work, honesty, a commitment to their home and child. Granted, their instincts on how to go about maintaining those things vary, but at their core, the couple wants the same things.
My husband and I watched the series this past weekend (it was the second viewing for me, Joe's first), and it reminded me of what I think about as far as what often attracts couples. As I mentioned, mostly it's similarities, but I also think something that's extremely attractive to people is finding someone who shores you up in areas where you're maybe lacking, or reluctant, or afraid. Olive basically says this in the last episode, when with Bill Murray's character she comments on how Henry may have driven her mad at times, but now that he's gone, it seems like he was the perfect man.
In searching for a clip to show of the show, I found this one and realized the scene sort of encapsulates Olive's whole character and the Kitteridge family dynamic in general.
I'll add this one of Frances McDormand discussing women's stories on screen in general.
I have to agree, Frances. Perhaps it's why I'm such a big fan of limited series. Trying to showcase a person, much less a complex personality over the course of 25 years, is very difficult to do well in under two hours. Olive Kitteridge is about four, and we probably still could've used more.
I deliberately haven't written much in this post about the plot of the series. Watching it the second time, I had forgotten how extraordinary some of the plot points are. And I don't necessarily mean that in a positive way. The connections with random death and violence and accidents in a relatively short period of time is a bit difficult to believe at times. It puts the characters in situations where the have to emote a lot, but honestly, it was a bit distracting at times.
Joe commented a handful of times on the poor quality of some of the supporting actors' performances. Not so for Zoe Kazan and Bill Murray. And both McDormand and Jenkins were astoundingly good throughout. In fact, I thought Frances was so good, I had a hard time picturing how Meryl would play certain scenes. That rarely happens. But eventually I envisioned it being a mixture of threads from Sister Aloysious from Doubt, Kate from Dancing at Lughnasa, and Roberta from Music of the Heart.
Reception for the series was even impressive, holding a 95% on Rotten Tomatoes, and a score of 89 on Metacritic. Both are indications of almost universally positive reviews.As I mentioned at the start of this post, Frances McDormand's performance was critically-acclaimed. She won the SAG and Emmy awards for Actress in a Miniseries or Television Movie, and was nominated for the Golden Globe (strangely losing to Maggie Gyllenhaal in The Honorable Woman). Three years later, McDormand went on to win her second Oscar for Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri. Will her every-third-year charm continue this weekend where she's nominated again for Nomadland? Tune in Sunday to find out.
This is the second consecutive film I bumped up a year. Considering the cast of this movie, I don't think it would've made much of a difference age-wise had it been filmed a bit earlier. The Hundred-Foot Journey pick might come as a surprise to some. Despite Steven Spielberg and Oprah Winfrey having produced it, I don't remember it as a super high-profile picture. But I really enjoy it. I think mainly it's the cinematography; every scene feels like its filled with tons of color. Even the moments that take place at night seem like they're bright. I get a similar sense from Julie & Julia,actually. And like that film, The Hundred-Foot Journey makes me want to eat. A lot.
Streep would of course take the role of Madame Mallory, originally portrayed by the great Helen Mirren. Mallory owns an upscale restaurant in Southern France. When an immigrant Indian family buys an abandoned restaurant across the street, a battle ensues over attention for customers, and the fact that the new neighbors are, well...not white French.
Hassan is the second son of the the owner of the new "Maison Mumbai," and has been groomed to become the head chef of his family's business. He had worked closely with his mother in India, before she was killed in a fire started by rioters after a disputed election. In the back-and-forth between Madame Mallory and Hassan's father, Om, Mallory's employees "in secret" deface the fencing outside of Maison Mumbai, and attempt to burn down it down. Madame Mallory fires the guy responsible, and when she takes it upon herself to clean it up the graffiti, Hassan, who's hands were burned in the fire, asks if he can make her an omelette. A sous chef at Mallory's restaurant, Marguerite (with whom Hassan sparks a bit of a romance), had previously told him that Madame Mallory can tell if a chef has what it takes to be great by tasting one bite of their omelette.
"What, more spice?" I really like this movie, even if some of the dialogue and plot points are a bit low-brow. And it's not a bad role, either. It's certainly not as layered as say, Nic from The Kids are All Right or Big Edie from Grey Gardens, but I think Madame Mallory has a few interesting things in her "arc" that would be interesting to see Meryl negotiate and perhaps elevate.
Madame Mallory is part of an old guard of snooty culinary insiders. France is of course a mecca for fancy cuisine, and Mallory's livelihood and legacy (and ego) depend on her achieving that elusive second Michelin Star. There's a brief reference to her late husband's former involvement in the restaurant at one point, so I guess we're expected to assume that she might carry that torch within her as well. Then there's the more interesting piece to this, in that Mallory, like probably most white people and especially most white people born before 1980, grew up with a certain amount of prejudice. Had the family been Swedish, I doubt there'd be as much of a conflict there. We get to see her get past some of that, if in a tired sort of way.
I can't pass up the chance to talk about a new accent. Meryl has spoken French in other films (Plenty, a little bit in her Julia Child voice), but never done a French accent on screen (that I can think of). It got me thinking about how Québécois director Xavier Dolan has stated that he'd written a script for Meryl. I wonder if it would've been for a character whose first language was French. I think Mirren does a fairly good job, but I have to say that I tend to hear a bit of British in everything I've seen her do. Then I got to thinking how there's probably a difference between doing a French accent in English if it's someone who lives in Europe versus North America. Native French speakers who live in Europe probably learn British-sounding English, which no doubt has a slightly different sound in a French accent than American English.
Mirren snagged a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress in a Musical or Comedy. The film was a box office success, earning close to $90 million worldwide on a budget of $22m. Mirren and director Lasse Hallström (The Cider House Rules, What's Eating Gilbert Grape, Chocolat) were both praised, and the film received decent reviews, despite the being what many critics thought was "predictable food porn." Sometimes it's just nice to watch flicks like that though. And it feels good to leave a movie in a better mood than when it started.
In February of 2012, Disney was finalizing a deal to purchase the rights to the Blacklisted script, Saving Mr. Banks. Both Tom Hanks and Meryl were rumored as being eyed to star as Walt Disney and P.L. Travers. I posted about it at the time of course, which happened to be about a week before Meryl was officially confirmed to star in August: Osage County. Both films were ultimately filmed around the same time later that year. This was likely what prevented Streep from participating in Banks, as it's been reported that Emma Thompson was hired after the studio was "unable to secure" Streep.
Knowing how long of a process it had been to get Banks to the screen, had it been ready six months earlier, it's reasonable to expect that it could've been released in late 2012, a year earlier than its original release. Similar to The Last Station, I had written upSaving Mr. Banks in my Shoulda Coulda Wouldas tag as a film I wanted to include in my Reimagined Filmography of Streep's screen career. With this new project, however, I get to move Banks to a parallel filmography that doesn't overextend what would've been a very tight shooting schedule.
The film depicts the story of P.L. Travers, the author of Mary Poppins, and the tedious process Walt Disney undertook to secure the film rights to the story in 1961. Travers is against almost all of the creative team's plans and suggestions--loathing songs, the idea of animation, and basically anything that doesn't seem to fit the literal depictions of what she's created in her books. We come to learn that the story of Mary Poppins is a deeply personal one for Travers, particularly with the relationship shown between the children and the seemingly uninvolved father. Multiple flashbacks show a young Travers in Australia, where she idolizes her alcoholic father (played by Coin Farrell), and is devastated when he succumbs to tuberculosis.
It's nice at the end when we get a better look behind the harsh facade. Thompson has stated in interviews that this role was one of the best she's ever had, due to the character's complexity, and often unpredictable and contradictory behavior. I reread my Shoulda Coulda Woulda post, and I agree with what I said then, that Thompson was a little one note for much of the film. Yes, Travers is supposed to be cantankerous and prickly, but I would've liked to get a better sense of the conflict in her from an earlier start. The flashbacks sort of do some of that work for us, but I can't help but wonder how Meryl would've approached that tricky inner dilemma. It's bad enough that Travers has surrender her beloved story out of lack of money. On top of that, the sacred place she has for her aunt (on whom the character of Mary Poppins was largely based), is being threatened with a sugary, overly Los Angeles-y screen depiction that she detests. There's a lot to work with there.
The film garnered good reviews and was a great box office success. Anything related to Disney is going to find its audience. Streep is a better known actress, so it's unlikely it would've fared any worse had she starred as Travers. Thompson hit all the precursor awards, only to be left out at the Oscars. Meryl missed BAFTA but received both Golden Globe and SAG nominations. Many believe her Academy Award nomination for August: Osage County that year was undeserved in Thompson's place. Personally, I think that's laughable, but still wish Thompson had been recognized as well. I wouldn't have minded if Amy Adams had missed for American Hustle to make room for them both.
In the summer of 2010, Disney announced its sale of Miramax to Filmyard Holdings. One of the films that ended up getting its release date postponed was John Madden's spy thriller, The Debt. Big names like Helen Mirren and Tom Wilkinson, and then up and coming box-office star from Avatar, Sam Worthington, all teaming up with an Academy Award-winning director (Shakespeare in Love) made for a lineup that created early Oscar buzz. Those predictions never came to fruition, however, likely in large part due to the delayed nature of the film's release, and not because of the film's quality.
The project was a remake of the Israeli film, Ha-Hov. Helen Mirren plays a retired Mossad agent in Tel Aviv, Rachel Singer, who, along with her two co-agents from thirty years prior, has been harboring a secret about their mission to capture a Nazi war criminal. They had indeed captured the man, but he escaped, and rather than face their government, they fabricate a story about the man's death. Well, turns out the man lived, and a journalist claims he's going to interview him. Rachel is now consigned to find the Nazi in a Ukrainian hospital and finally bring him back to Israel.
That was a very abbreviated snapshot of the film's plot, but it's tedious going into too much detail about it. Suffice it to say, it's totally worth watching, and it would be a fascinating character for Meryl to portray. For starters, y'all know I'm a sucker for hearing new accents. Meryl would get to try her hand at what I understand to be an Israeli accent, or more specifically, a Hebrew or Modern Hebrew accent. The character also speaks some subtitled scenes in Russian as well, so that would be fun. And considering Meryl's skill for Polish, I suspect she'd similarly had nailed this fellow Slavic language.
Aside from Rachel being a badass intelligence agent, the more nuanced character points come from the struggle with recalling the events in 1965, and how she's had to live for decades with a lie that has repercussions on a global scale. This brings us to the fact that a good chunk of the movie takes place in the past, with a different cast portraying the younger versions of the characters in Germany. The scenes are wonderfully acted and exciting, but the casting makes the film far more difficult to follow than it needed to be. I've read a few reviews that share the same concerns about poor physical resemblances among the two sets of casts. While I'm not a stickler for perfect matches on features, I don't like getting taken out of the film by distractions or questions like "which one is he supposed to be?"
It's easy with Rachel, as Jessica Chastain (before she was a star) portrayed the younger counterpart. She and Mirren don't exactly resemble each other, and neither do she and Streep, particularly. The bigger issue is with the guys, however. Sam Worthington (David) looks NOTHING like UK actor Ciarán Hinds, and Martin Csokas and Tom Wilkinson are a rough match as well. The storyline isn't super difficult to follow, but there's a fair amount of jumping back and forth in different time periods, and when there's a switch in casts, it can be a bit tricky to follow.
Of course, I have thoughts on how to remedy the above issues. I can't help but think that Andrea Riseborough would've been a perfect match had Meryl been cast as the "1997" Rachel. She was originally cast as Meryl's daughter in August: Osage County before scheduling conflicts brought in Juliette Lewis. It's a more believable extension of Rachel from her late twenties to her late fifties.
And what about Out of Africa alum Klaus Maria Brandauer for the 1997 version of Sam Worthington's character, David?
And as much as I enjoy Tom Wilkinson, I feel like Ciarán Hinds, who originally portrayed the older version of David, might have fared better as Stefan:
I think these casting adjustments would've made for a more coherent storyline. We don't need such confusions from the plot or from the superb acting. And Rachel would be an interesting person to tackle. I wonder if Meryl would've had a conversation with the actor playing the younger "her." The two characters are no doubt different people form each other. After all the trauma young Rachel goes through, and then the years of possible shame for both having kept her secret and the fear that she and her colleagues will be found out. But then there's that chance at redemption--not only for herself, but for her fellow agents, country, and the Jewish people. Lots for an actor to do here, and Mirren eats it up as one would expect.
The film did fairly well with critics, with a 77% on Rotten Tomatoes. But it got sort of lost in the shuffle I think, with the aforementioned delays it had prior to its official release. I also realize that some people might not consider the 1997 version of Rachel a lead part, because a good portion of the movie takes place with the younger trio in 1965. But I argue that had Meryl been involved, it would've been like a Julie & Julia situation, with Meryl going lead. Mirren, after all, did receive top billing. Streep would've been an even bigger draw.
Another easy choice. The role of Nicole "Nic" Allgood in Lisa Cholodenko's The Kids Are All Right offers the opportunity for an interesting and difficult portrayal. I watched the film again recently, and liked it more than I remember I had in my first one or two viewings. From the start, I couldn't help but compare the setting to the movie Meryl actually shot around the same time this movie filmed, It's Complicated. It's a bit of lifestyle porn, watching folks in sunny southern California spending their days in a beautiful garden and their evenings sipping Petite Sirah over salmon and steak. I didn't realize just how many scenes in The Kids Are All Right include eating and drinking. I enjoy that.
Nic and Jules are a lesbian couple, the parents of Joni (Mia Wasikowska) and Laser (Josh Hutcherson). Joni has recently turned eighteen, and Laser pressures her to get in contact with their biological father, whose donated sperm their parents used from a cryobank. They end up connecting with their donor, Paul (Mark Ruffalo), and the "non-traditional" family begins to merge their lives in certain ways, to varying levels of comfort for all involved.
Nic is the family's breadwinner, an OB/GYN who "likes her wine" and is a bit of a control freak. She's very wary of Paul and his presence at first, threatened by his more relaxed attitude and influence on the kids. Bening does such and amazing job in this role. She's a woman thrust into the position of having to fear the loss of her family. She wants to be supportive of her kids' interest in identifying their biological father, yet you can see she's upset by the apple cart sort of being shaken up on her micromanaged little unit. Add to the fact that, just when she starts to like him, Paul sleeps with her wife, and we get a minefield of new emotions layering her already complex character.
I think there would be a unique feeling of betrayal if one member in a same-sex marriage happened to cheat with someone of the opposite sex--especially if both in the marriage profess themselves to be gay. One would think it shouldn't matter much. Cheating is cheating, right? And sexuality is on a spectrum, right? But there's already a huge hurdle to jump in the mere fact of feeling safe in and having your same-sex relationship validated. If you're the one being cheated on, like Nic in this situation, I expect you'd have to feel doubly isolated when considering the natural question, as Nic voices to Jules after discovering her infidelity, "Are you straight now?"
I have to include this brief scene as well because I just think it's funny.
I wish I could've found a clip with the part right before this where Laser asks his moms why they watch "gay man porn." Their reactions and attempts at explaining are just so funny and awkward, despite their best efforts to simply be transparent and honest in response to their son's perfectly natural question. Jules's reply that they often hire straight actresses in lesbian porn is a bit ironic, considering both Moore and Bening are indeed straight, portraying a gay couple. No doubt that would be met with a lot of online shouting were the film to be cast today.
This film was a an enormous critical success. It holds a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes and a score of 86 on Metacritic. For its tiny budge of only $4 million, it raked in over $34 million worldwide. I have to expect that had Meryl been cast, it may have cost a tad more, but also grossed more. She was a hot commodity (and continues to be) the few years after The Devil Wears Prada and Mamma Mia! Bening was widely praised for her performance as well, winning the Golden Globe for Actress in a Musical or Comedy (which the film incidentally won as well). She also scored nominations for SAG, BAFTA and Oscar, losing all three to Natalie Portman in Black Swan. Portman's sweep of the televised awards and many of the top critics awards was one of the most dominant we've seen by a leading actress. Bening's had some amazing performances over the years, but has come up against others that are almost undeniable winners from the start. Maybe she'll have her due in a couple years when she channels marathon swimmer Diana Nyad in the upcoming biopic, Nyad.
