Snubs #6: "Plenty"

Now that I've completed my year-long supporting recasting project, I've got a little more time and space to consider some other posts. It's also been a relatively quiet period for project news for some months, and while we await the release of the third season of Only Murders in the Building, I happened to take a quick peek at what I'd previously posted in the Snubs tag. 

Plenty, based on David Hare's play, was released in 1985, the same year as Out of Africa. I honestly feel like I can almost stop arguing anything further about what might have prevented Meryl from getting recognized for awards consideration for Plenty other than the fact that she happened to have a more prestigious, showy, and viewed film out the same year. We all know Meryl was nominated for an Academy Award for her lead role in Out of Africa (the film won Best Picture). But what do we think the chances of her having otherwise squeaked in (at least somewhere) for portraying Susan Traherne, a woman who subsequently disassembles after finding life back in England post her participation in the French Resistance during World War II void of meaning. 

I happen to think that Plenty is not only a pretty good movie, but also a brilliantly portrayed character study on Meryl's part. Susan is an otherwise stable and strong person, but she struggles with the banality of life after the war that she ends up hurting herself and everyone around her. It's one of the few roles Meryl has done that deeply covers the pain and struggle (for both the person and their loved one) someone can go through when they suffer from mental illness. It wasn't necessarily talked about a lot in that way back then (or even when the movie came out), but those details and nuances had to have been a tricky road to navigate for Meryl, and I expect that few people would've done as good of a job. And as much as I enjoy both the film and Meryl's performance in Out of Africa, dare I say I think the actual character in Plenty is more interesting and complicated. It may have just been easier to get pulled along with all the fuss surrounding Africa than to garner awards recognition than for the much quieter Plenty. 

 

All this isn't to say that there may have been a large crop of people who simply didn't think Meryl's performance was worthy of their vote. 1985 was a crowded year for ladies in a leading role (imagine that), even if Out of Africa and Plenty competed a year apart at BAFTA (they were released in different years in the UK). The film wasn't necessarily a critical darling nor a box office smash, but both Tracey Ullman and John Gielgud happened to get BAFTA nominations for their supporting roles. I just can't help but expect that Meryl would've been pushed harder (or at all) for her role in Plenty for the North American awards groups had she not had the behemoth that was Out of Africa, a film which in addition to its aforementioned Best Picture win at the Oscars, was nominated in eleven total categories, ultimately winning seven. 

Snubs #5: "Let Them All Talk"

I can't believe it's been over five years since I've done a post in this tag! Probably a good sign...Meryl usually makes it into the top five for high-profile projects. But thinking about how Golden Globe nominations are now just a week away, it got me to thinking about how little love she was was shown from awards bodies last year with TWO lead roles in contention. 

This post could realistically be about either of the two films in question. Let Them All Talk was a Steven Soderbergh film for HBO which followed a pretentious Pulitzer Prize-winning author as she makes a crossing of the Atlantic with her two college buddies, played by Dianne Wiest and Candice Bergen. The film did well with critics, but of course we don't have box office returns to show because it wasn't really released in theaters. And despite it not perhaps having as large of a platform for getting the most eyeballs on it, I'm fairly shocked it didn't get more traction. 

There was a fair amount of buzz early on about Candice Bergen, as she ended up being a bit of a scene-stealer in the film. That obviously never panned out. Meryl never really got mentioned much for her role. I happen to think it absolutely deserved at least a Golden Globe nomination. last year. It's a subtle, funny, and exquisitely acted part. As usual, Streep does a nice job of making it difficult to remember it's her--which in this case is particularly hard to do, as it might not be difficult to see how she'd conjure up the behavior a pretentious artist. But it's like no other character we've really seen her play, which after forty years isn't easy. And they ad-libbed a lot of their lines!

 

I have to expect that it's possible that Meryl's better chance with Globe voters might have been with Netflix's The Prom. It wasn't a critics darling, but it was more greatly anticipated considering its star-studded cast and with a director, Ryan Murphy, who's had a lot of success in recent years. Plus, it was a musical! That in itself sometimes feels like it'll be a no-brainer...especially for Meryl. I really thought she was going to get in for it. When I saw that Kate Hudson made it for Music, I honestly wondered if the Hollywood Foreign Press was trying to make some kind of statement by leaving Streep out. 

Alas, she got zilch last year. While The Prom may have been expected to garner the greater batch of nods (for crying out loud even James Corden got nominated at the Globes), I maintain that Streep's greater work was as Alice in Let Them All Talk. Either were deserving for recognition in the Musical/Comedy category, and if she had had only one or the other for voters to choose from, I wonder if she would've been able to secure a greater number of votes.   

Snubs #4: "Ricki and the Flash"

Jeeze it's been over three years since I've posted in this section!  Now that the awards season for 2015 has wrapped up, I think it's okay to officially complain about the fact that Meryl received no recognition for her performance as Linda 'Ricky' Rendazzo in last year's Ricki and the Flash.  Up to this point in my "Snubs" tag I've focused on films for which I thought Meryl deserved an Academy Award nomination.  I'll concede that Streep's work in Ricki was not necessarily up to that standard, but a Golden Globe nod should've been a lock.

Much of the issue with whether or not Meryl gets nominations is how long it's been since her last.  She had been nominated for an Oscar six out the last eight years. Having won her third in what some would consider a controversial year in 2012 for The Iron Lady, her two follow-up nominations were met with much less enthusiasm.  She barely squeaked in for August: Osage County, and although her reviews were good for Into the Woods, she garnered zero critics' nominations/awards for that role, leading some to believe she either shouldn't or wouldn't be nominated for Oscar.

With the news for Ricki coming out in early 2014, we were all a flutter with anticipation, namely due to the pedigrees of those involved.  Jonathan Demme directing a script by Diablo Cody with Meryl in the lead role seemed like the perfect recipe for success.  Meryl would learn guitar, rock on stage and get to work alongside her daughter Mamie in the film.  How can this not be a huge winner?

Alas, the film did not live up to expectations.  It's possible that it was never intended to be "that" movie, but I think most of us were hoping that if it didn't fit the bill for awards, it would at least be a box office success.  Its returns weren't terrible, but nothing like It's Complicated, Mamma Mia! or even Hope Springs.  Oscar was out.  Up until Golden Globe nominations were announced last December I still thought Meryl would make it into the top five for Musical/Comedy.  Instead, the field included the following actresses:

1. Jennifer Lawrence (Joy)-winner
2. Melissa McCarthy (Spy)
3. Maggie Smith (The Lady in the Van)
4. Amy Schumer (Trainwreck)
5. Lily Tomlin (Grandma)

Admittedly, this was a tough top five to crack.  Reasonable category fraud for Lawrence, but having seen Joy, it's not as blatant as The Martian.  Loved Schumer.   Having not seen the other three, how can I say Meryl should've made it?  If we're really considering acting and not humor or film success, I find it very hard to believe Streep was not more deserving than at least one of these ladies.  I can't begrudge Tomlin or Smith their due as actors over 70, and both Schumer and McCarthy headed box-office juggernauts.  Despite her fine performance, I'm afraid Lawrence would be the one I'd replace.

If there were ever a year to not get too upset at Streep being left out of the "season", it was this one.  Ricki as a film wasn't strong enough to contend with the others in its category and Meryl is an almost perennial nominee.  Let someone else in, I guess.  Ultimately, this only better sets her up to earn record 30th Golden Globe and 20th Academy Award nominations for Florence Foster Jenkins.  

Snubs #3: "The Hours"

Meryl's performance of Clarissa Vaughan in the 2002 adaptation of Michael Cunningham's Pulitzer Prize-winning novel The Hours earned her nominations for a Golden Globe, BAFTA and several critics groups awards...but not for Oscar.   The chances at a nomination for lead actress in this role, in this year, were stacked against Meryl.  For one, she was nominated in supporting for Adaptation that year (another "snub" for not winning imo), and the Best Actress category was kind of crowded.    The nominees were as follows in lead:

Salma Hayek (Frida)
Nicole Kidman (The Hours)
Diane Lane (Unfaithful)
Julianne Moore (Far from Heaven)
Renée Zellweger (Chicago)

Kidman's role was arguably supporting if we look only at screen time, considering it was under 30 minutes if memory serves.  But her character of Virginia Woolf is sort of intertwined with the other two main characters (Meryl and Julianne Moore), so it's passable.  Moore was nominated in supporting for her role as Laura Brown.   So yes, Moore was nominated in both categories that year.  For Meryl to be nominated in The Hours it would've happened in lead, which means she too would've been nominated in both categories that year.  Adaptation was a slam dunk as far as Oscar noms go, so unfortunately, she was the odd woman out in lead despite moments like this, courtesy of Simply Streep:




Had this film been released in a year where Meryl had no other performances of her own to contend with, her chances at a nomination would've certainly been much better.  That, coupled with the fact that there was a more baity lead role in the same film (Kidman) meant it just wasn't going to happen.

So, who should've gotten the axe had Meryl been nominated?  This is a really tough one.   Despite Moore being nominated in both categories, her performance in Far from Heaven was too good to dump.  My choice would unfortunately have to be Diane Lane.  I've seen her performance and it is fantastic.  But researching pre-season awards and nominations, Lane seemed to have the fewest, despite getting Globe, SAG and Oscar nods.  Like I said above, this year was pretty packed and all five honorees were well-deserved.  Meryl had to settle for her supporting nomination in Adaptation, eventually losing to Catherine Zeta-Jones in Chicago, whose awards campaign was (stealthily) switched from lead to supporting mid-season.  Well played, Harvey.  

Snubs #2: "Marvin's Room"

Jeeze, it's been since the inaugural post of this section on May 21st that I've covered a "Snub."  For my second entry, I've chosen 1996's drama Marvin's Room.  Meryl stars alongside Diane Keaton and Leonardo DiCaprio in Scott McPherson's adaptation of the play by the same name.   Incidentally, this was Meryl's second of what is now five films that were adapted from a play (Plenty, Marvin's Room, Dancing at Lughnasa, Doubt and August: Osage County).

This film is a good case of the what I consider the Academy spreading the wealth in Best Actress.  Meryl had been nominated the year before for The Bridges of Madison County.  For Marvin's Room she earned a Golden Globe nod for Best Actress-Drama and as part of the cast for SAG.  Her co-star Diane Keaton was nominated for the Globe, SAG and Oscar, winning none.  In the film Meryl plays Lee, sister to Bessie (Keaton).  The two sisters have not seen each other in 20 years, as Lee left the Floridian family to move to Ohio with her husband.  Bessie, who now has leukemia, stayed behind to care for their ailing father.  Lee pays a visit to have her and her sons' blood tested as a possible life-saving marrow match for Lee.

What I really like about Meryl's performance in this film is that, with the exception of her sort of campy performances as Mary Fisher (She-Devil) and Madeline Ashton (Death Becomes Her), this is the first role where we really get to see Meryl play a serious character who isn't particularly likable. Some may insert Lindy Chamberlain here, but I disagree.  People didn't like Lindy's public persona.  But in A Cry in the Dark, we get an intimate look and Lindy the woman, and I found her nothing but likeable and someone with whom to empathize.   Lee conversely reminds me of a cranky, middle-aged,  small-town neighborhood mom.  I know the type well.  In short, Lee's an incredibly selfish person who doesn't treat her family very well.  Yet, Meryl (again) convinces me.  Despite me having seen her in countless "nice" roles, I forget it's anyone other than mean Lee.



Of course when there's a story that basically involves two lead women, it's a tough sell to push both for awards.  Bessie is the meatier of the two roles.  She's the super sweet caregiver who stayed to care for an ill family member, and on top of that, she gets diagnosed with cancer.  A bit heavier and a bigger vote-getting role.  The film was distributed by Miramax, and in the mid 90's I wasn't really paying attention to things as closely as I do today, so I'm not sure what the campaigning was like then.  My guess is that the Weinsteins saw Keaton's role as the better vehicle for awards that year.

The Oscar nominees were as follows:

Brenda Blethyn (Secrets & Lies)
Diane Keaton (Marvin's Room)
Frances McDormand (Fargo)
Kristin Scott Thomas (The English Patient)
Emily Watson (Breaking the Waves)

Frances McDormand took the award for her portrayal as a Minnesota homicide detective in the Coen brothers' quirky noir piece.  Don't hate, but I've never seen the film.  I know, I know.  This is particularly strange considering I was born and raised in the North Star State.  I can remember seeing previews for the film when I was 16 and asking my dad why the characters were talking the way they were.  Evidently my Midwestern accent wasn't that strong because their speech seemed completely foreign to me.  Neither have I seen Secrets and Lies nor Breaking the Waves.  I'm definitely going to make a point of watching Fargo, and with what I've read about Secrets and Lies, I may have to give that one a look as well.  The English Patient was super boring the first time I saw it, but that was a huge film that year, again produced by Miramax.  Blethyn did win the Globe for Lies, but McDormand won the SAG, so I suppose she would've been the frontrunner. Although if Madonna won the Globe over McDormand for Evita, who knows?

Bottom line: Keaton deserved her nomination, and again, pulling a Thelma & Louise with a double lead nomination is a pretty tall task; it's much more common in supporting.  Considering Emily Watson wasn't nominated for the SAG, I say she would've been the odd woman out had Meryl snuck in the top five for Oscar. 

Snubs

New section!  As the post-Oscar months continue to be a fairly slow period for Meryl news, it's a good time for me to expand my entries to include a section I've had in mind since this blog's birth.   In "Snubs" you'll find my opinions on films for which Meryl was not, but reasonably could have (or should have) been nominated for an Academy Award.  As I've stated before, it's no secret that I favor Meryl's film work over other genres, which makes Oscar races that include her that much more thrilling.  Lucky for me she holds the record for most nominations.  Contrary to what some people believe, Meryl is not nominated every time she makes a movie, about one third of the time in fact.

The first role I will discuss for this section is Senator Eleanor Prentiss Shaw in a remake of The Manchurian Candidate, released in 2004.   There are of course several factors that go into someone getting an Oscar nomination.  Quality of performance is typically pretty high on the list, but that's a given for Meryl, which suggests that other factors are at play.  I think we can pretty much resign ourselves to the fact that any role Meryl is in, unless the film absolutely sucks or the part is very small, is worthy or being ranked in the top five performances of the year.  So, what stood in the way this year?

Let's break it down.  One of the big things could've been the fact that the film was a remake of the the 1962 version that included Angela Lansbury as Senator Shaw.  Lansbury was nominated for an Oscar for her performance.  I'm not aware of any two people being nominated for the same role in two different versions of a film.   I haven't seen Lansbury's full performance, but clips I have seen of it were superb.

A second factor is the summer release.   July 30th isn't the typical campaign slot for Oscar contenders.  Of course it's certainly not a death sentence, but it shows that the production company may not have thought too highly of its chances for major awards.    Keeping in mind that it was an election year, I wonder if they wanted it released prior to November while interest in political goings-on was still high.  If that's the case, and it makes sense because film makers ultimately want their films to produce revenue, they may well have thought that political climate rather than awards buzz was a better shot of getting butts in the seats.

One certainly has to take into account the other performances that Meryl was up against in the supporting category.  The list of eventual nominees at the Academy Awards that year was as follows:

Cate Blanchett (The Aviator)
Natalie Portman (Closer)
Sophie Okonedo (Hotel Rwanda)
Laura Linney (Kinsey)
Virginia Madsen (Sideways)

I've actually seen all five of these performances, and believe are all very well deserved.  Blanchett, the winner, had the "due" factor on account of her own snubbed loss in 1999 for Elizabeth.  Portman had won the Golden Globe,  Okonedo was a newcomer in a very powerful film,  and Madsen simply delivered a stellar performance in a fantastic movie.  That leaves Laura Linney.  I have to say that I'm a huge fan of Linney's work and hope that she wins an Oscar someday (Hyde Park on Hudson (2013(?)), but I'm choosing her as the odd woman out on this one.  Yes, she was one of three actresses who was nominated in this category for Golden Globe, SAG and Oscar (Madsen and Blanchett the other two), but I feel if I had to choose, she's the most expendable.   I loved Kinsey, and Linney was great in it.  But compared with the other roles there just wasn't as much punch.  Unlike this:



This clip is from youtube so don't sue me.  Meryl was nominated for a Globe.  Mick LaSalle, a critic for the San Francisco Chronicle wrote of her performance, "no one can talk about the acting in 'The Manchurian Candidate' without rhapsodizing about Streep.  She has the Hillary hair and the Karen Hughes attack-dog energy, but the charm, the inspiration and the constant invention are her own. She gives us a senator who's a monomaniac, a mad mommy and master politician rolled into one, a woman firing on so many levels that no one can keep up — someone who loves being evil as much as Streep loves acting. She's a pleasure to watch — and to marvel at — every second she's onscreen."  He was no doubt referencing this scene.

Interestingly Portman, after winning the Golden Globe wasn't even nominated for the SAG.  I think up to that point, she had been the favorite for the Oscar.  Obviously there was a lot of indecision that year among voters.  I don't think the fact that Meryl had been nominated so many times in the past was a huge factor in not voting for her.  Frankly, I think having lost two years prior in supporting for Adaptation to Catherine Zeta-Jones in Chicago would've been a bit of a boost, but to no avail.  Meryl would have to wait another two years (four years total--her second longest span between nominations) to be nominated again for The Devil Wears Prada.