After it was announced that Glenn Close was set to star in an adaptation of Tove Jannson's novel The Summer Book. I decided to get a copy from the library and read it. My interest was of course the fact that it was an adaptation with one of its central characters being of a certain age. It was a quick read, and I have to admit that I was a little curious as to how the hell they were going to adapt it to a movie. But they did!
The "story" (and I put that in quotes because there is very little plot to the story) surrounds a three-generation family: Sophia (Emily Matthews), her father (Anders Danielsen Lie), and her grandmother (Close), as they spend the summer together on an island in the Gulf of Finland in the aftermath of Sophia's mother's passing. They never really talk in specifics about how they're all coping or grieving. I think I read somewhere that it's more about the tone of the performances and cinematography than any drama in the screenplay. And wow is it a beautifully shot movie. The setting very much feels like it's own character in the story, which is sort of necessary with how little plot there is. Again, I could not find a clip of an actual scene from the movie, so I'm including one of the trailers here.
One thing that makes me wonder about whether or not Meryl would've been interested in this role is how old it's played. Close is only two years older than Meryl, but if we compare this role with Miranda Priestly, the two actors are basically the same age when they did their filming. And yes, Grandmother is not a New York fashion executive, where everything is all polished and put together. Meryl certainly doesn't shy away from roles that are not glamourous. But she does often play roles where the character is at times ten to fifteen years younger than she is. Partly it's because she can. And partly, I imagine, it's because there just are just fewer roles for women who are truly meant to be pushing 80. The longer you can believably portray someone younger as a woman in Hollywood, the longer you're likely to do it, because it's probably more likely that directors/producers/casting directors can realistically envision you in the role.
Close does a beautiful job in the role, pairing with Matthews as they explore the natural terrain around the island. They get dirty, grow things, make things, celebrate midsommar, navigate some dangers. It's a tender juxtaposition of age and youth, and as mentioned above, it is so beautifully shot with so many of the scenes taking place out doors. Meryl isn't in a lot of movies that feel sort of meditative and quiet. This would have been an interesting and fun opportunity. And she would've gotten to do a Finnish accent!
The film did fairly well with critics, sitting at 81% on Rotten Tomatoes and a respectable 62 on Metacritic. Glenn close garnered the most favorable notices of all. But my guess is that the movie was so quiet (box office of $2 million) that it just didn't gain any traction with awards bodies. Still a lovely watch, regardless.
Not unlike with my last post on Women Talking, when it was first announced in late 2023 that Pedro Almodóvar was going to direct his English feature-length debut with The Room Next Door, I wondered if there might be a role for Meryl. Based on the novel entitled What Are You Going Through by Sigrid Nunez, my understanding was that it was about two women friends over fifty who share some kind of secret. We knew that Almodóvar and Meryl had previously planned to work together on Julietamany years before, so it didn't seem out of this world to wonder if maybe they'd finally get to connect. Well, that didn't last long, as shortly after, Tilda Swinton and Julianne Moore were cast as the two friends.
I would recast Meryl in the role of Swinton's character, Martha, who's battling terminal cancer and doesn't want to endure the gradual pain and decline of the illness. She reconnects with an old author friend (Moore), Ingrid, with whom she used to work at a magazine. Martha asks Ingrid to stay with her at a rented house, and to be there when she takes a euthanasia pill. Ingrid hesitatingly agrees. The two get reacquainted, and Martha shares the background of her relationship with her estranged daughter, Michelle, whose father was a Vietnam war vet with PTSD who later remarried but died trying to save non-existent people from a house fire. Ingrid eventually finds Martha dead on the patio, and she has to defend herself against a religious policeman who suspects Ingrid knew/participated in Martha's taking of her own life, which is illegal. John Turturro plays a writer friend of Ingrid's (who happened to be a former lover to both Ingird and Martha), and he helps her with finding a lawyer who can help deal with the aftermath of Martha's death. Ingrid calls Michelle, and the two stay at the house together. The end.
Almodóvar definitely has a distinct style in his directing and choice of cinematography. The movie is very colorful, the dialogue is a bit melodramatic (but it works), and the characters and scenes always feel like they might be in a dream. This is not unlike my experience in watching Julieta, and if Meryl had originally been interested in doing that film, and had been familiar with Almodóvar's work, I imagine she would've expected it. It's also a great character to unpack. Yes, we've seen her suffer with cancer in One True Thing, and a bit in August: Osage County. And there's a bit of that in this movie. But this character is sort of taking the bully by the horns in controlling the exact moment of when it all ends. I've mentioned a couple of times I think in this latest bout of recasting posts how Meryl is drawn to difficult things. Tackling a situation where a character has decided to euthanize herself, and the tricky scenario it would create when considering asking someone to be there with you, and seeing that play out...it's good stuff.
I couldn't find a great clip of Swinton, but that was gives you a sense of the movie's tone. Almodóvar has the movie set in New York City and upstate New York, but to me, the film looks very European. Not surprising that some of the scenes were shot in Madrid. I remember seeing an interview with Moore and Swinton where one of them said that the film is Pedro's vision of what upstate New York looks and/or feels like.
The question comes to mind of whether or not Meryl would be too old for this movie. I argue no. Swinton and Moore are both about ten years younger than her, but we also know that Meryl can easily play someone even today who's believable to be in her early to mid 60s. Just look at The Devil Wears Prada 2. She looks incredible and youthful in how she moves. I don't think she'd have any issue portraying Martha here. I do, however, think that pairing her with someone closer to her own age would be better, as the pair are meant to be contemporaries as far as I can tell, and they're known to have shared the same lover in Turturro's character. Just feels more like they should be similar ages. I wonder if Michelle Pfeiffer would've been a good option for Ingrid. Still has that kind of sophisticated polish with which Moore imbues Ingrid, but Pfeiffer just feels a bit more of Meryl's generation to me, and it would be amazing if they worked together!
The Room Next Door received relatively strong reviews, and won the Golden Lion Award at the Venice International Film Festival. It holds a score of 81% on Rotten Tomatoes, and a 70 on Metacritic. Swinton was often singled out as best in show, and she earned a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress in a Drama.
Way back in 2015, I posted about whether or not Meryl might star in a script from that year's Hollywood Black List. The overwhelming candidate was Robert Specland's script about marathon swimmer Diana Nyad, fittingly titled, Nyad. I'll say up front that at the time, Meryl would've been a perfect age to portray Nyad, who, in the story is in her early 60s. Fast forward to 2023, and Annette Bening eventually stars in the movie, with a new script by Julie Cox, based on Nyad's 2015 memoir, Find a Way.
I had been fortunate enough to read Specland's script, and I found it wonderful. To be honest, I don't remember a ton of differences between his and Cox's, but I think the latter puts more focus on the relationship between Nyad and her longtime friend and former coach, Bonnie Stoll. I even suggested at the time that Jodie Foster would be a good fit to direct or even star as Stoll, the latter of which she did (the actual directors were Elizabeth Chai Vasarhelyi and Jimmy Chin, in their narrative directorial debuts). I can remember having understood that Meryl swam for exercise, and that although it seemed a bit of a stretch for her to want to do something so physically demanding, the challenge itself would've been an exciting prospect.
Nyad grew up as a competitive and decorated swimmer. In her twenties, she attempted to become the first person to swim from Cuba to Key West and failed. Not until she was in her early 60s did she set out to try again, and on the fourth try, she made it. Quick note: her swim has not been ratified by the World Open Water Swimming Association due to various discrepancies with documenting the swim. But my guess is that she did it. And she was the first to do it not inside a shark cage, which, when used, can apparently increase your speed.
The movie itself tracks Nyad's preparation and attempts at the swim. She corrals her friend and formerly brief love interest, Bonnie Stoll to help coach and train her. Tons of things go wrong along the way. But the story is kind of like Titanic, where even though you know what's going to happen, if the movie is good enough, you wonder if you might just be wrong. Bening succeeds at characterizing the passion and drive Nyad had to have to even consider such a daunting feat. We learn that much of the drive behind her efforts is related to abuse she suffered at the hands of her former coach, and one has to wonder if her completing the swim is sort of like Clarice Starling in The Silence of the Lambs, where Hannibal Lecter identifies that Clarice wants to save a young woman from being murdered in an attempt to silence the screams of a lamb she was unable to save as a child, the same way Diana can overcome her traumas by putting her mind to and accomplishing the seemingly insurmountable achievement.
I have to admit that Bening's performance, while very good, doesn't really remind me of Nyad herself. I've seen a handful of interviews with Nyad, and I just don't see much resemblance. Maybe she wasn't going for a super close characterization, more of capturing of her spirit or a more general idea of her. Not that I desire actors to completely mimic real people they're playing, but I enjoy (particularly if I'm familiar with the person), getting fooled a little that it's really that person on the screen. Meryl, of course, is exceptional at that, and I suspect that she would've taken pains to match Nyad's distinct style of speech. Nyad's father was Greek-Egyptian as well, and I've heard her do a great impression of him with his accent. She also speaks Spanish in the film, which I believe Nyad speaks fluently.
A quick note on age: re-watching the film, Bening and Foster definitely just feel younger. They are younger than Mery, of course, but the tone of the film would probably have been a bit different if Meryl had been in the role. She's definitely played people over ten years younger than her on paper (Streep would've been 72 when filming (Nyad was 64 when she completed her Cuba-Florida swim). Totally doable. But the biggest difference I think there would've needed to is recasting Bonnie as well. I've often thought that Sigourney Weaver would've been great in the role, and she would likely seem much more of a realistic contemporary to Streep's Nyad, which I think is important for the story. Foster could've stayed attached as director, though!
The film did pretty well with critics, standing at 85% on Rotten Tomatoes and a respectable 63 score on Metacritic. It was a Netflix film, so although it debuted at Telluride and had a short run in theaters, it pretty much didn't make any box office money. Bening and Foster both earned Academy Award nominations for their performances, in lead and supporting, respectively.
The selection for this year was also rather easy for me. I saw the movie sometime in 2022 and not only quickly considered it for my recasting project, but ended up liking it enough I revisited it more than once following. Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris is a delightful comedy adaptation of Paul Gallico's 1958 novel. I'm pretty sure I saw the 1992 TV version starring Angela Lansbury when I was a kid (titled, like the novel, without the "H" in "Harris", to account for how the characters actually pronounced it).
The plot follows Ada Harris, a war widow in 1950's London. She's works as a cleaning lady who dreams of purchasing a couture Christian Dior gown, after having seen one in her employer's closet. Through a series of happy accidents, she comes up with enough money to make the trip to Paris, thinking she'll just step in to the shop and buy the dress she wants. Enter Dior director, Claudine Colbert (portrayed by Isabelle Huppert), who's not a big fan of Ada's humble background and the sort of tarnish she seems to think it has on the house name. The problem is, the other employees are endeared by Ada, and they do what they can to make sure she gets her dress fitted. When she returns to London, she lends her dress to a dumb actress who manages to burn it to shreds on a heater. And in a serendipitous turn of events, the dress that Ada had originally wanted (they're couture so there's only one!), became available, and due to the impression she left on the employees at Dior, they send it to her with warmest regards. Hurray!
It's a bit of a sugary movie, but it works. And if realistically considering the order of the few previous films I've included in my lead recasting project (The Wife, Catherine the Great, Nomadland, Mass), they're not exactly romps, and therefore a bit of lighter fair at this point would be very much due. There's also more to the role than the sort of good vibes we get from things working out for Ada. Meryl would be able to unpack the sort of baggage that Ada carries with her regarding her MIA husband. It's more like denial, and those close to her seem to recognize that, and perhaps even Ada does, but she doesn't want to quite believe that he's never coming back.
There's also the juxtaposition of class. Meryl certainly explored this in The Iron Lady. And although much of the Mrs. Harris Goes to Paris takes place in France, the vibe is the same, where simply by the fact that she's not an aristocrat or politician or the wife of a prominent businessman, that she doesn't belong. The scenes with Isabelle Huppert would've been nice to see. There are some fun back-and-forths between those two characters. On the surface, Huppert's character seems kind of one-note. But even for a relatively small role, we get some background on her sort of hard exterior, as it's revealed that she cares for an elderly and infirm father.
I can't help but think about the movie The Hundred-Foot Journey when watching this movie. There's the French snootiness and strong patrician character who looks down on a new and possibly less polished person in her arena. And the tones are similar. There's conflict, but you always kind of get the sense that things are going to work out for the people you're rooting for, which again, seems like a good fit following a string of very serious selections in this lead recasting series.
The film was praised by critics, with a 94% on Rotten Tomatoes and 70 on Metacritic. Manville was particularly lauded, deservedly, garnering a Golden Globe nomination for Best Actress in a Musical or Comedy. And for a rather modest budget (which would've been slightly less modest I imagine, had Meryl been in the pic), it was a box office success, earning $31.4 million against a budget of around $10-12 million.
In 2020, I completed a year-long recasting project with my entry on Frances McDormand's Academy Award-winning performance in Nomadland. I followed it up a couple years later with my similarly themed supporting project. I had always intended to continue on with entries for each year, but I wanted to give things some time to breathe. So here I am, exactly five years later, to provide my updated list. I'll be posting an entry every Monday until I've completed recasting lead roles from 2021-2025, and supporting roles from 2023-2025.
My selection for 2021 has been one that I've had in mind pretty much since it was released. Mass is a chamber piece by American Fran Kranz in his directorial debut. The film follows a meeting between two couples who get together to discuss, question, and hopefully find a way to heal in the aftermath of their sons'deaths. The tricky part is, one of the sons was murdered in a school shooting by the other couple's sons. Right off the bat, it's a difficult concept and scenario, right up Meryl's alley.
The role I've specifically chosen to recast is Ann Dowd's role of Linda, the mother of the shooter, who subsequently took his own life after the shootings. As always, my intention with imagining recasting Meryl in the role is not to impugn Dowd's work. She is absolutely brilliant in the movie and I have no way of knowing if I'd prefer Meryl to her or anyone else (or in any other film). It's just fun to imagine, the same way I enjoy seeing different performers cast in the same play or opera. As an aside, it's always been a bit perplexing that people tend to get a little antagonized at the suggestion of someone wanting to see other actors in previously cast parts. We do it (and enjoy or even crave it) in other mediums. Why should film or TV be any different?
Anyway, I rewatched the movie this week for the first time since it came out. I remember enjoying it and being very impressed by both the screenplay and acting performances. I have to say, I was even more impressed the second time around. Talk about tackling difficult topics! Dowd is partnered by Reed Birney, who plays the perpetrators father. The parents of said victim are portrayed by Jason Isaacs and Martha Plimpton. Six years have passed since the tragic shootings, but emotions are still raw, as the couples meet in a church basement to chat.
I wish I could find a more lengthy clip of one of Dowd's monologues, but alas, no luck. You get a sense of what the back and forth is like. The conversation touches on gun violence of course, the politics surrounding access to firearms, parenting, and mental health. Compelling arguments and questions are raised by all performers (who by the way are all exceptional in their respective roles), but for me, the crux of what all it came down to, from a personal level, is that the parents of the victim just wanted to have a place to put their pain. The way I experienced it in watching the movie, was that they wanted so badly to hear from the shooter's parents that there was a clear, identifiable reason of how or where they had gone wrong as parents. Then they could have an answer, a living culprit, an object for their anger and emptiness. The trouble is, there probably wasn't any one thing the parents of the shooter did that was much different from what any other parent who loved their son would've done. And, possibly, they did more than most parents would do to tackle any red flags they encountered about their son's behavior. That's what's so maddening and painful about it, I think, for the parents of the victim. Maybe it wasn't preventable, as far as the behavior of the shooter's parents was concerned.
Ultimately, we get to see what looks like some catharsis and forgiveness, when Plimpton's character shares after all their discussion that she though (paraphrasing) that she'd lose her son if she forgave the shooter's parents. Wow! But that she realized this wasn't the case, and the anger and resentment, and her desire for the other parents to be punished began to lift.
The film received overwhelmingly positive reviews, with a 95% on Rotten Tomatoes and a score of 81 on Metacritic, indicating "universal acclaim." I realize that all of Dowd's recognition came in the form of nominations in the Supporting Actress category, but I think it's totally reasonable for the four main characters in this movie to be considered lead. Realistically, if Streep had been in the film, it might've actually been easier for Plimpton to get more noms in supporting, as they would've put Meryl, the more seasoned actor and bigger name, in lead.
I 'officially' end this thirteen month-long project with the 1992 sports comedy-drama, A League of Their Own. All I seem to think about when referencing this movie is summer. It's incredibly nostalgic for me that way, as I've grown up as a fan of Major League Baseball, and this film captured the sort of old-timey and even rural appeal of America's favorite pastime. That definitely hit home for me as a twelve year-old living across the street from a corn field fifty miles outside Minneapolis.
I've wondered for some time how Meryl would fare in a film for which she had to perform some kind of athletic event. We've seen in a physical role like The River Wild, but never in something that required the specific kind of coordination necessary for a sport like baseball. I've read that Meryl is actually very athletic. Some of her Yale classmates have remarked how she was always good at everything, including sports. I have to admit that I can kind of see it. She seems to have a great sense and control of her physicality, and that often translates into athletic performance. Director Penny Marshall specifically sought out actresses who could be passable as adept ball players. She apparently denied several very good actors roles because they simply sucked at the sport. It was a real standard she held, and it shows in the film's cast.
The uncertainty of Meryl's baseball abilities isn't the only obstacle to picturing her potentially being suitable for the lead role originated by Geena Davis. Streep would've been 42 when this movie filmed. The majority of the remainder of the cast was a decade younger. But similar to my post last week on The Silence of the Lambs, I'd like to make a reasonable argument for how it may have worked in regard to Meryl's age--and I don't think it means ageing up the character of Dottie Hinson.
It's widely known that Debra Winger was all set to play the role of Hinson. Some accounts attest her dropping out a couple of weeks before shooting to a back injury. But director Penny Marshall has gone on record saying that Winger didn't want to be a part of the film after Madonna was cast. She apparently thought Madonna's participation would turn the production into a circus. Incidentally, Winger was also a replacement for Demi Moore, who dropped out after she became pregnant. Geena Davis stepped in last minute, and after an audition (which was mostly about seeing whether or not Davis could "play"), was cast. She had very little time to prepare before shooting began.
So let's imagine there had been some connection with Meryl. She had given birth to the last of her four children in early June 1991. There's no way she would've ever planned to film something that summer. But what if in this situation, she had somehow learned of Winger's departure, had been sent the script, and really felt like doing it. Something that would be a big physical challenge postpartum. A role that, on paper, was expected to go to someone in her twenties or early thirties. It would've been a fairly impulsive move at that stage. But the draw of a big hit might've been lure enough. Couple that with a shooting schedule that may have reasonably started late summer. A twelve week maternity leave would've put that at the first week of September. Not too crazy to imagine. And Winger was less than six years younger than Meryl (Davis seven), so I expect that our disbelief could probably have been suspended.
What's interesting about the age thing is that the character of Dottie, to me, always seems so much the big sister and much more the contemporary of Tom Hanks's character. Davis of course fits that perfectly and played it well. But it might be even more believable with Meryl in that role. Perhaps more a thread of the elder sister who too has had dreams deferred on a rural farm with a husband fighting in World War II. There are some elements that could add layers to the complexity of the character. Her age, as a sort of matronly figure among the younger girls in the league, could be played up to greater contrast. And maybe near the end where Dottie mentions that she and Bob "want to have kids," what if the line were simply changed to "want to try having kids again?" There's a general undertone of melancholy enveloping Dottie's character. A mixture of her worry about the safety of her husband, and her strong, yet seemingly stifled desire to participate in the league. She's of a personality that finds it abhorrent to demonstrate any sense of vanity, even though she's both the best player and the prettiest. As a small aside, I think Streep and Lori Petty pass much more easily as sisters than do Petty and either Debra Winger or Geena Davis.
With this last film in my recasting addendum, we have seen consecutive roles in a television miniseries, a sci-fi action flick, an epic Western, a psychological horror/thriller, and a sports dramedy. Two are contemporary settings, two are period pieces, and one takes place in the future. Not a bad quintet of varied roles and genres.
I've mentioned over the course of this project that I plan to do the same thing for supporting roles. I'm just not sure when I'll start that, exactly. I also fully expect to continue my list of recasted lead roles for each year in the future. For now, however, I look forward to focusing a bit more of the blog on Streep's upcoming project(s), and of course speculating on what else she might have in store for us in the coming months. Thanks again to everyone who's read and contributed to this very fun series over the past year!
One of my all-time favorites. Thinking back, I can't believe I watched this for the first time when I was twelve years-old. Knowing my parents, if we had sat down to watch something on HBO, for example, and this movie came on, I have no doubt they would not have let me continue watching at that age. But curious kids are curious kids, and I was aware of the films box-office success even way back then. When I saw it listed in the TV guide as being broadcast on cable, you better believe I tuned in, alone in the privacy of our basement. I remember my dad eventually knew I'd seen it, as my cousin and I asked him what the c-word was. He wasn't exactly thrilled, but he didn't put up much of a fuss. I ended up recording the film on our VCR.
I imagine some readers may be wondering, "Are you suggesting Meryl for the role of special agent Clarice Starling? But she's too old!" The answer is yes. As this is possibly my favorite movie, and absolutely consider it one of a handful that most shaped my love of cinema (and no doubt my morbid fascination with serial murderers), I really wanted to include it among my recasting selections. To do that, I have to suggest some changes to the iconic character originated by Jodie Foster. Namely, her age. Hear me out.
We know that one of the main features of Clarice in The Silence of the Lambs is that she's a young FBI trainee. Someone likely in her twenties. Inexperienced. Smart, but unsure. It's an important part of the dynamic between her and the super sophisticated nuance of Dr. Hannibal Lecter (played brilliantly by the great Sir Anthony Hopkins). But what if we imagine the character was, say, 35--nearing the cutoff point at which candidates will no longer be considered for becoming an agent for the FBI. Meryl would've been 40 at the time this movie filmed in the fall of 1989 (its release was pushed to early '91, as Orion Pictures wanted to focus its awards attention on another little film they had in their quiver that year, Dances with Wolves). So, absolutely no issue with Meryl playing 35. For whatever reason, I picture her character having a ponytail and bangs. Seems like it would make her appear a bit younger. And if we consider the history we learn about from Clarice, where she becomes an orphan and runs away from a relative's ranch and is then sent to an orphanage, it might be an even more compelling history if it took longer for her to scrape up the means for college at UVA (perhaps having to work and go to night school over the course of six to eight years), to then work her way up to the training academy. That might be more of an accomplishment. The stakes would higher with her working against the clock a bit in regard to age. But not so long in the tooth that she'd lose that important sense of innocence and "greenness" Clarice needs. What a fun prospect to imagine Meryl working to convey all that.
One of the most memorable scenes in cinematic history. And I'm not sure if Meryl has done a West Virginian accent quite like this one--always fun to consider. While this film is arguably very character-driven, the aspects of a genre film are in there. Many would classify it as a true horror film, or a psychological thriller. Meryl's never quite done something as edgy as Silence of the Lambs was for its time. The movie was an example of how a film released early in the year could actually do well at the Oscars. And that it did, winning the top five (Picture, Director, Actress, Actor, and Screenplay--only It Happened One Night and One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest managed to do that previously, and none have since). It was also a major box-office success, with a worldwide gross of $273 million against only a $19 million budget.
I will say that while I maintain that this film is brilliant, I wonder if it would be as well-received today. The character of Buffalo Bill doesn't exactly show transgender individuals in the greatest of lights. I understand that even Dr. Lecter explains that Buffalo Bill isn't a "real transsexual," yet it's a little difficult to look back on this picture and not sort of get the impression of transgender folks having been depicted as a bit crazy. Some may think it's not a great look when gender identity is obliquely utilized as a tool to showcase creepy characters. I don't tend to view it quite that severely, but it's worth mentioning the film isn't a perfect picture. Although it's nice to see a woman lead in a movie who doesn't have a romantic relationship as part of the story--hopefully that's not negated by the gruesome fact that the story follows a killer of women. But it's sort of representative of the types of films Jodie Foster seemed to gravitate toward.
In the end, I think this could've been an incredibly exciting role and story to see interpreted through Meryl's characterization. Next week, I'll "officially" wrap up this recasting series when I take on a lighter film from the summer of 1992.
Way back in 2012, I bemoaned in my inaugural post of the Shoulda Coulda Wouldas tag how much I wished I could've seen Meryl tackle the role of Stands with a Fist from Dances with Wolves. I ended up including this film in my Reimagined history of her career. As I've mentioned in earlier posts in this recasting project, I've realized that the Shoulda Coulda Wouldas section has turned out to be the well from which I sort of designate roles into my two 'alternative'careers I like to imagine Streep having. I think Dances with Wolves ultimately fits better into my recasting project.
Like the two previous choices from this recasting addendum, Dances with Wolves holds a prominent place in my memory as one of the films that helped shaped my interest in cinema. It's for this reason that I didn't wait for my supporting role recasting project to include this pic. I'm not sure if I saw it for the first time today if I would regard the film as highly as I do. But it's next to impossible to accurately gauge the answer to such a question when I've held such nostalgic fondness for this film over the years.
I first saw the movie shortly after it was released to home video. I would've been around eleven or twelve at the time. It's interesting how depending on what's going on in our lives at any given point, certain experiences can have memorable impact. We may not notice or realize it at the time, but looking back, what I saw on the screen in this movie was a community I'd learned about and thought about, but never really seen depicted in such a vivid way. I'd spent a lot of time in the north woods area of Minnesota growing up, where Native American influence and culture was obvious even to my young eyes. I can remember visiting a place called Deep Portage, a wilderness learning center, and was fascinated by the stories and replicas of the indigenous peoples' way of life. The focus was more on the Ojibwe people, not the Sioux (I say "Sioux," as that it what they call themselves in the film--I suspect Lakota is a more accurate term, while Sioux includes more than one group of people and language), but regardless, when I saw Dances with Wolves, it was like my curiosity had been brought to life in the form of a sweeping epic.
The actual role of Stands with a Fist is of course a fascinating one. Not that the idea of a white child taken in and raised by Native Americans was a brand new idea. But the position she finds herself in, having to try to translate for her tribe and adoptive father, all while still in mourning from the passing of her own husband, offers a juicy start to the character's arc.
So many emotions to convey in just this one scene. Fear, frustration, sadness, surprise. Maybe a glint of attraction. Mary McDonnell does a tremendous job here. I remember seeing an interview with director/star Kevin Costner about the movie, where he states that he specifically wanted an actress for the role who "had lines on her face." Meryl is only three years older than McDonnell, and easily could've portrayed this character form an age standpoint. Then of course there's the fun aspect of language she would've gotten to tackle. Not only having to sound like you speak fluent Lakota, but also figuring out what the character would sound like in English! She hadn't spoken it since she was a child, and I think it's so fascinating to imagine how much we would lose if we didn't use it. When we started to try to recall words, which parts would come back to us? Certainly not always automatically the first syllables. I think Meryl would've dug deep into the nature of how all that would begin to resurface.
I've read some items over the years that this film is just another white savior movie. It think that's a bit of a copout. If anything, I think it's the Native Americans who save the white guy. I can remember even as child never once considering that the white folks' way of life in this film was in any way superior to that of the Sioux people. I'm also not naive to the fact that the Sioux are almost depicted as a utopian society in this movie, which certainly is not historically factual. But they're probably closer to it than any of the cities in the United States during and around the time of The Civil War.
Regardless of any of the historical considerations, Dances with Wolves is and will remain a special movie for me. With its broad, beautiful landscape, convincing performances, and endlessly engaging musical score, I know I'll continue to revisit it in the future.
Meryl hasn't really done a good sci-fi pic. Yes, there's The Giver, but that ended up being kind of a stinker. I had included Close Encounters of the Third Kind in the early stages of my recasting project, but inserted her into a supporting role. I'm reminded of Sigourney Weaver's legacy as an action star, having starred in the Alien series, the second of which (Aliens) was directed by James Cameron. I never really got into that movie, but from a young age, I absolutely loved both of his Terminator films, as well as 1989's underwater flick, The Abyss. There's something about the latter film that really captures the feel of what I liked about action movies at the time. There was a fair amount of technology utilized, and the setting was something we'd never really seen before at that level. Yet at the same time, we also get some intimacy and complexity surrounding the close-knit cast of characters who are thrust into the tumultuous scenario driving the film's more entertaining scenes.
The film follows a crew oil workers who are tasked by the government to aid a SEAL team in recovering a nuclear warhead at the bottom of the ocean. Dr. Lindsey Brigman is the designer of the drilling platform utilized as a base for the operation. It's a bit of a tired trope to have the lady professional depicted as the queen bitch of the universe. But it's probably a fun character to play. Someone who's smarter than everyone else in the room and doesn't suffer fools or a slow pace. Mary Elizabeth Mastrantonio (such a name from the 80s) does a fine job in the role, if perhaps a bit one level in the first half of the film. There are some fun moments of tension and humor between her soon-to-be ex-husband, Bud (Ed Harris), who's the foreman of the rig.
One of the most memorable moments of cinema from my childhood was watching Lindsey's drowning scene. After Lindsey and Bud are left with only one oxygen tank in a rapidly flooding sub, Lindsey insists Bud use it so he can drag her hypothermic body back to the rig and resuscitate her.
Watching it as an adult, it's a tad far-fetched. From my understanding, using an automated external defibrillator is generally only indicated when someone's heart is beating irregularly, not to "shock it back" to life. CPR would be the usual approach, which they do implement here as well. Some definite artistic license here, but played well for dramatic effect. It's a powerful scene and beautifully acted. The actors create a great sense of collegiality in their reactions to Lindsey eventually coming around. I have to imagine drowning would be one of the most horrible ways to die. The feeling of having to finally take in a breath and only having water enter your lungs? Super scary. And it feels super scary for Lindsey in this scene. Would've been fun to see how Meryl played it. I did tend to wonder why Lindsey didn't seem more affected after the fact, considering Bud was basically beating the shit out of her when she lay there on the submersible deck. Her ribs and chest would've been so sore, I imagine it would've made her ability to speak normally very difficult in the days following. Lindsey seems to have recovered pretty well when she's guiding Bud down the Cayman Trough, based on the way Mastrantonio plays it.
This film is so stamped in my mind as sort of encapsulating the feel of several movies in the genre around the late 80s and early 90s. Terminator 2: Judgement Day is a big one, as I eluded above, Die Hard, even Rocky IV, with its capitalizing on Cold War tensions between the United States and the Soviet Union (although interesting that The Abyss is set in 1994 when there actually was no longer such a thing as the U.S.S.R.). I don't know if it was just a style around the time, or maybe that The Abyss has so many scenes underwater, but everything has a blue-like tinge to it, particularly in scenes without natural lighting, that seem very reminiscent of the time. It's easy to forget that The Abyss isn't just an action film. There's an alien marine life that ends up saving Bud at the bottom of the ocean. Some of the greatest special effects for the time were employed for this film (it won the Oscar for it that year), particularly the face-mimicking water formation into which the alien choses to take shape. The idea of there being technology that allows humans to breathe water to minimize the effects of the oceans pressure was always a cool prospect to think about, even as an adult.
It's interesting that in Meryl's real filmography, 1989 marked a very distinct shift in the type of movie in which we usually saw her. She-Devil may have some fun tidbits, but in general, it's not a strong movie. This was the first time Streep took on a true comedy role, which she ended up doing more of over the next few years in the early 90s. I wonder if she had taken the risk of participating in something like The Abyss, would it have resulted in a major difference in what we could've expected from her shortly afterward, or what she would've been offered? The Abyss wasn't a huge box-office success, but it did fairly well with critics, and I think it's often considered an underrated movie these days. From what I've read, filming under James Cameron was extremely difficult for the cast. But maybe it could've been the same kind of physical toil Meryl had to endure when she learned how to white water raft in 1994's The River Wild. I'd take her in The Abyss over that or She-Devil any day.
As I mentioned at the end of my final "official" selection of this project, I'm going to add a series of five entries that sort of encapsulate what has historically appealed to me about cinema. The more I think and write about Meryl Streep's career on screen, the more I'm reminded of how I got here. It's no accident how I ended up latching on to someone who's able to portray such a wide variety of characters. In Meryl, I get to vicariously experience worlds that I, almost without realizing, have loved imagining from an early age.
The fact that many of the films that have shaped my taste in cinema also happen to showcase interesting and complex women is also probably not a surprise, considering where my interests obviously lie now. The 1988 CBS miniseries, Bluegrass, is one such example. Directed by Simon Wincer (Free Willy), I was eight at the time this was released, and from my first viewing I was in love. When it was replayed a couple of years later, after my family had acquired its first VCR, I managed to realize it in time to record the second half. I damn near wore that tape out over the years. Not until well into my 30s, perhaps after finding a clip on YouTube, did I acquire a bootleg DVD copy woefully transferred from VHS. The scenes from part one were surprisingly fresh in my memory.
I should probably clarify that this miniseries didn't necessarily shape my taste in movies, so much as it was one of the things I watched over and over. Maybe it's more accurate that my interest in it more showcased what I liked, and the kind of lives I enjoyed seeing captured on screen. To some degree, I've found in looking back that it's often what I think I've enjoy about seeing such a wide variety of people and worlds portrayed in Streep films. In Bluegrass, we follow Maude Breen, a widow who heads back to her native Kentucky to get a fresh start. She buys a rundown farm and is considered a bit of an outsider, as her neighbor is a high-profile thoroughbred breeder and judge (Wayne Rogers), who also just happens to be someone who tried to rape her as a teen. She sparks a romance with her alcoholic farm manager (Brian Kerwin), and navigates a love triangle involving him and a charming Irishman (Anthony Andrews--bizarrely with an English accent), who ends up almost destroying her farm by introducing a diseased mare into the fold.
It was all very sophisticated to my young brain. I've watched it multiple times as an adult (still waiting for a high-quality version) and that sense of adult intrigue has of course softened a bit. But I still think it's a very entertaining and well-acted production for network television in the 80s. No doubt there's a nostalgic aspect in it for me. It does hearken back to the tropes of wealth and excess so often displayed in that decade (thinking Dallas and Dynasty), though Bluegrass feels less crass about it, even to this day.
I always thought Cheryl Ladd was so pretty. And Brian Kerwin is a dreamboat. I'm reminded of the great supporting turn of Mickey Rooney. Also that of Diane Ladd (no relation), who although not shown in the video, has some of the best one-liners among the large cast of characters. There are next to no clips out there of this film, but in these few scenes, we get to see a bit of the moxie in Maude's character. It's perhaps a bit overdone on occasion, but I like the conflicts of her trying to hold her own in a very male-dominated world. That wasn't necessarily depicted with regularity at the time. Of course there was like zero chance Meryl was ever going to star in something like this. And I don't think it's realistic to imagine she ever would've if the timing had just been right. That doesn't stop me from the imagining how she may have interpreted certain scenes, perhaps adding her two cents in regard to certain aspects of the script where she could've imbued some more complexity or gravitas to the character and her history. She also would've gotten to ride horses and try her hat at a Kentucky accent. It's a shame the series didn't garner any strong critical or awards attention. Although Wincer is credited with bolstering the popularity of the miniseries with his following year's highly successful project, Lonesome Dove.
These days, I tend to think horse racing is a bit of a barbaric business. More and more we hear about animals having to be euthanized on the track due to injury. Of course I didn't think about things like that at the time Bluegrass was released. And I still like to tune in the first Saturday of May each year to watch the two most exciting minutes in sports. For years I collected model horses, which as an adult seems WAY gayer than I ever considered as a preteen. My interest was boosted when my uncle bought a pair of Arabians for his farm, and he arranged for some riding lessons for me and my cousins. I'm not sure if the series was really the catalyst for an interest in horses, or more that I watched it on repeat because the interest was already there. Either way, I'm still drawn to the allure of that gentile setting depicted on the ranches of Bluegrass. Does anyone reading this know someone at CBS who can finally get us a decent-quality copy to view? If so, kindly send them my way.
Exactly one year ago today, I posted my first selection in this recasting project. I hadn't planned to make it such a tidy timeline. But last week, when I thought about how close I was to the end, I decided to look back and check just what the date actually was. It's sort of a nice button to put on this whole thing. My intent in making my selections was to pick roles that diverge from things we've seen Meryl do before, many of which were from films that happen to be special to me in one way or another. After fifty-two weeks and forty-five films, I hope I've done the process justice.
And what a film to end with. It's been only a little over a month since the drama Nomadland took home the big prize at the Oscars, along with a Best Director award for Chloé Zhao, and a third win for Frances McDormand in Best Actress. McDormand plays Fern, a woman in Nevada who's husband has recently died, and who loses her job after the gypsum plant in her town shuts down. She decides to purchase a van and essentially become a nomad, taking temporary or seasonal work where she can. She travels to Arizona to join up with a community of other nomads, learning how to survive with very little.
The film was based on the nonfiction book of the same name, which follows how older Americans during the Great Recession (around 2008) adopted transient lifestyles. Many folks found themselves out of work and close to retirement, and decided to reject the usual nine-to-five of corporate America to hit the road and explore the vastness of the American landscape. Several of the real-life people depicted in the book portray themselves in the film. Fern eventually befriends a fellow nomad named Dave (David Strathairn), whom she ends up visiting at his son's home. Dave reveals his feelings for Fern, and offers to let her stay with him and his family for good. Fran declines and ends up returning to the Arizona community. It's here toward the end that we get a more intimate glimpse into how she got to where she is now.
There are some similarities in the tone of this film and that of Ironweed. Maybe it's because I'm not a person who's even remotely interested in abandoning certain creature comforts, but I found myself a bit anxious throughout both films. Fern's situation is far less dire than Helen's, yet there's a certain underlying melancholy felt around both women's existences. I don't get the sense that Fran necessarily wants to live the life of a nomad. She was more compelled in some way in the aftermath of her husband's death, and the loss of her both her town and job. McDormand does a great job with the complexity of that. She's pulled in different directions. She's got the support, encouragement, and validation from her fellow nomads. Then there's her sister, and residents of her former town who are perplexed and put off by her choice to live the way she is. Again, it's a job well done by McDormand, for example, when explaining to a friend that she's not "homeless," just "houseless." There are nuances in those sorts of uncomfortable interactions that would fun to see Meryl play.
I like the theme of not waiting until you're too old or decrepit to actually live a little. Granted, some might not consider the life depicted in Nomadland as a particularly attractive one, but it is to the folks who embrace it. I suppose each of us has some ideal concept or vision of what life can be like like beyond the toil of what's required of us to earn a living. It may not be in a van, but it's somewhere or something.
The film was an overwhelming critical success (94% on Rotten Tomatoes and 93 score on Metacritic). It's cinematography is stunning, and even more impressive considering how bleak some of the scenes likely seemed to be on paper. McDormand's Oscar win may have surprised a few people. It was one of those years where I could have seen four of the five nominees legitimately coming away with a win. With hers, McDormand became only the second woman to ever win three lead acting trophies at the Academy Awards (Katharine Hepburn has four). I'm not super interested in analyzing what it means (if anything) for Meryl's legacy. Streep could still win another one...or two. So could McDormand. I tend to think McDormand's second win only three years ago for Three Billboards Outside of Ebbing, Missouri should have one hundred percent gone to Sally Hawkins for The Shape of Water.
But we could go down that endless rabbit hole of who did and who should've all day long. It doesn't help answer the question of who the better actor is (if that's even an answerable thing). It's perplexing that Bette Davis, for example, has only two Oscars, while Hepburn has four. I wouldn't put up much of a fuss if someone used that example as a fair comparison of Streep and McDormand's film careers thus far. In the end, I'm just glad to see such great films getting made that showcase women (particularly women of a certain age demographic). It raises the question of whether Meryl might find herself producing more projects in the future the way McDormand does. Places, Please may be the start of that.
While this is officially the last entry in my recasting cannon for Meryl, in the coming weeks, I'll be posting about five films that I'll consider an "addendum" to the current list. The selections cover a brief stretch of time that, looking back, sort of shaped my taste in cinema, and that all happened (not surprisingly in retrospect) to include memorable roles for women. And stay tuned in the future for when I do a full recasting of supporting performances! Until then, I'll leave you with the full list of lead roles from the past year of this project. My great admiration goes out to all the monumentally talented performers who originated the roles listed below.
1976: Hester Street (Gitl)
1977: Close Encounters of the Third Kind (Jillian Guiler)
1978: Julia (Julia)
1979: The Rose (Mary Rose Foster)
1980: American Gigolo (Michelle Stratton)
1981: Reds (Louise Bryant)
1982: Frances (Frances Farmer)
1983: Romancing the Stone (Joan Wilder)
1984: A Passage to India (Adela Quested)
1985: Agnes of God (Dr. Martha Livingston)
1986: Crimes of the Heart (Rebecca Magrath/Babe Botrell)
1987: Anna (Anna)
1988: Gorillas in the Mist (Dian Fossey)
1989: Dangerous Liaisons (Marquise Isabelle de Merteuil)
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.
