Tag Archive for 'Meryl Streep'

I’ve been watching Zoe Kazan since I saw her on stage in The Seagull where she and Oscar nominee Carey Mulligan acted circles around veteran actors Kristen Scott Thomas and Peter Sarsgaard.  Last year was a breakthrough year for her onscreen playing daughters, first of Robin Wright in The Private Lives of Pippa Lee and then of Meryl Streep in It’s Complicated.

But this year begins with a bang and Zoe gets her own film.  She stars as the Exploding Girl in Bradley Rust Gray’s new film.  He wrote it for Zoe after they spent a lot of time walking and talking together.  Zoe plays Ivy a young college student home for spring break.  She’s at the beginning of a new relationship with a guy at school and this week away has made Ivy unsure of how they feel about each other.  Ivy is a typical 20 year old and spends a lot on time on the phone.  The cell phone is basically a character in the film.  The conversations with Ivy and the boyfriend are full of awkward silences and remind us that while we might be more connected to people, at the same time it’s even harder to truly connect.

The emotions of a young woman not yet an adult and no longer child are written all over Zoe’s face.  She’s at the stage where everything feels slippery and unsure.  She doesn’t yet know where she fits into the world and to complicate matters she also has to deal with a chronic medical condition that has made her grow up much faster than others around her.  For example, she might have a hard time having children because of the medication she takes.  That’s just her reality.  She also can’t take a bath alone because she could have a seizure and drown.  But she manages this chronic condition with the help and understanding of her long time friend Al (played by Mark Rendall), and their week together (his parents rented out his room so he sleeps on Ivy’s mom’s couch) brings to the fore feelings she really never knew she had.

Zoe Kazan is the real deal.  She’s going to have a long career in film and theatre as an actor and a writer since she is also a playwright.  I am excited to keep watching her work.  Count me as a big fan.

Aside from the historic Bigelow win there were several other moments during the Oscar show (which I still strongly feel was really bad, but I was tweeting the whole time) and the wrap up that are worthy of note.

Mo’Nique

The woman rocks.  She did everything this whole season on her own terms and every time people tried to bring her down and shame her for it, she said I am not playing by your bullshit rules.  The fact that she won proves that art triumphs over bullshit.  She took all the shit that was shoved at her and rose above it, big time.  I really hope Hollywood learns a lesson from how Mo’Nique was treated.  There were racist quips, sexist shit (you know the crap about her shaving her legs) and in general a whole lot of you need to kiss some Hollywood ass if you think you are going to win this award.

Yesterday, on Oprah she talked about dedicating her win to Hattie McDaniel, the first African American woman to win an Oscar which she did for the 1939 film Gone With the Wind.  McDaniel, as Kate Harding at Salon reminds us, was not able to attend the opening of Gone with the Wind because the theatre was segregated.

Here’s what Mo’Nique said about the moment before they announced her name:

They are going through the nominees and I know this woman Hattie McDaniel had to endure so much in this industry.  And because of her is why you sit (talking to Oprah) where you sit and I sit where I sit because she did so much for all of us.

Sandra Bullock

So she beat Meryl and poor Meryl has not won in some 25 years which is unbelievable to me.  Part of it is that everything she does is Oscar worthy so that people think they don’t need to vote for her because she will be back again and again.  News flash people.  She’s taking some time off.  She made two movies this past year, both directed by women directors.  Both made $100 million.

But the thing about this year and the Sandra Bullock factor is that we all know that not everything that Sandra Bullock does is Oscar worthy.  She’s the first to admit it.  The Blind Side hit a chord in the country.  As did Sandra Bullock.  Remember, things suck out there (out here).  No matter how much they tell us the recession is over.  Things are still really hard and The Blind Side gave people a moment to feel better about things and themselves.  That’s why it has made a fortune.

And Bullock rode those waves all the way to the Oscar win. She was so funny talking about her kiss with Meryl that people can’t let go.  She talked about how during the awards season the group of nominees became a sorority and that they all liked and respected each other.  And she tore down some more bullshit about how women hate each other.  Here’s what she said to Oprah:

They pit women against each other all the time.  They don’t do it to the men.  I am so sick of it.

Here’s her wonderful acceptance speech.  I loved how she gave tribute to her mom It is worth watching again:

Barbra Streisand

How poignant must it have been for Barbra to have the honor to announce the first female directing winner when she has been so visibly snubbed by the Academy in the past.  There are of course women who directed great films before Barbra.  One, Lina Wertmuller, was nominated before Barbra made Yentl and The Prince of Tides which was nominated for best picture and best actor for Nick Nolte but she was not nominated for best director.  Barbra chose to direct when she was a gigantic huge acting and recording star.  She chose to direct and got shit for it.  She is a trailblazer and let’s not forget it.  Here’s what she said after she gave the award to Bigelow:

I hope there will come a time when it will not be about a woman director or a man director but will just be about who the best director is.  When there is no regard for gender.  That it’s just about the talent.

Other Thoughts:

I did love Geoffrey Fletcher winning for Precious.  Now I know people are upset because he forgot to thank Sapphire.  In his defense he was beyond shocked.  You could see it on his face and hear it in his voice.  The fact that Precious got that award over the film everyone (including me) expected Up in the Air really shows how much that film resonated within the Hollywood community.

I loved Gabourey Sidibe’s awesomeness on the red carpet.  She showed no signs of nervousness and has come through this Oscar season as the most unexpected and  success.  Every single time I see her I smile.

Rachel Abramowitz of the LA Times and Lisa Schwarzbaum of EW weigh in on what a Bigelow win means for women (and the business.)

Abramowitz’ piece In Hollywood, female film directors are still the exception lays out the stats on where women are and how far we still have to go:

Bigelow’s likely ascension to the podium at the Academy Awards has provided a jolt of adrenaline.

For instance, neither Warner Bros., the world’s largest studio, nor Paramount Pictures hired a single female director last year, while Walt Disney Studios and Universal Studios hired just one apiece. No woman has ever been hired to direct an event picture with a budget of more than $100 million, the kind of film most valued by the Hollywood machine.

One apparent growth arena for women is in working for other women. Streep, for instance, told The Times that she attributes her box office renaissance to the fact that she opted to do three films, “Mamma Mia,” “Julie & Julia,” and “It’s Complicated,” that were written and directed by women, as well as backed by studios with women as presidents of production or even higher in rank.

And Schwartzbaum’s piece Kathryn Bigelow: If she wins the Oscar for directing, does that mean it’s been a great year for women?

As a movie-lover, I hope Bigelow wins, because of, well, her great directing of The Hurt Locker. As a woman (and thus, apparently, an oracle for the purposes of his little pre-Oscar feature) I’m aware of and excited about the significance of such a win, since she’d be, oh, the first woman ever to take the trophy in that category (and only the fourth ever nominated). But as a movie-lover, I’d like to think that if a man had directed The Hurt Locker as well as Bigelow did, then he would win the Oscar. I’d like to think that if Bigelow wins, the biggest benefit for women who want to make movies in Hollywood — a Hollywood run, as most of the world is run, by men — would be greater industry-wide recognition that talent comes in all sexes, colors, and sizes. A woman can make an action flick or a war movie; a man can make a feminine romance. All we want is to see stories that move us, excite us, entertain us, challenge us. Sometimes those movies are about alien blue people. More often, those movies are about people with whom we can identify, characters who look as young or old as we are. And as male or female, too.

AMEN.

So it wasn’t perfect, but it’s the beginning and next time will be better. Nothing ventured, nothing gained.

If you can make it through the first couple of minutes of me talking to myself about Kathryn Bigelow and the Oscars, the show starts to rock when Sasha Stone of Awards Daily joins.

Let me know what you think.

You have to check out the NY Magazine piece that Mark Harris wrote on the Oscar campaign.  The more I read and learn about this stuff, the more it resembles politics with handlers telling people what to wear, what to say, where to go and how to act.

It seems so bizarre, but there is a lot at stake here, not only money, but prestige and bragging rights.  If you were a person in the film business and lucky to work on something that had Oscar potential, you would work your ass off to get there.  Cause, really, how many people in the world can say they are an Academy Award winner or even nominee.  Oscar is the top of the mountain.

But while on the surface everything looks pretty, Mark Harris dives into the ickiness factor that starts seeping out of the awards circuit if you look a bit too closely.  Looking at the reality of the merry go round these actors, directors and stars go on reminds me of the push towards election day.  Kissing babies and shaking hands all towards that coveted Oscar nomination.

Here are some of the parts I liked.

When Sandra Bullock tied with Meryl Streep at the Broadcast Film Critics Awards:

Bullock, who has never come anywhere near an Oscar nomination but is riding a wave of big box office and positive press for The Blind Side, is almost as good as Streep at the podium: She gives the kind of emotive, funny, ingratiating speech that makes people say, “Maybe she should win,” just because it seems like fun. All at once, we have a contest—and the most interesting acting face-off of the season, since the excellent narrative behind Streep (namely, There Is No Way on God’s Green Earth That This Woman Should Have Fewer Best Actress Oscars Than Hilary Swank) must now fight off Bullock’s, the much simpler Who’da Thunk It?!

Continue reading ‘Oscar Campaigning’

Building on our earlier conversation about Golden Globes, I reached out to many different female film writers and bloggers about the Oscar nominations.

I laid out a couple of things to consider:

• A woman directed movie, The Hurt Locker matched a male directed movie, Avatar – nomination for nomination. Pretty groundbreaking.
• 3 of the 10 best picture nominations — Precious, An Education, The Blind Side — were for movies about women.
• 2 of the 10 best picture nominations were directed by women — An Education, The Hurt Locker.
• Only one of the five nominees for best adapted screenplay has a woman: District 9 – Written by Neill Blomkamp and Terri Tatchell
• NO woman was nominated for original screenplay.
• Bright Star got only one nomination for costume design.
• Meryl Streep got her 16th nomination, the most ever and Sandra Bullock as well as Gabby Sidibe and Carey Mulligan got their firsts.
• Lastly, what does Bigelow’s nomination here and win at the DGA mean for women directors (if anything.)

The participants include (in alphabetical order):

Manohla Dargis, NY Times: Jan Lisa Huttner, The Hot Pink Pen; MaryAnn Johanson, Flick Filosopher; Jenni Miller, Cinematical; Mary Pols, Time; Katey Rich, Cinemablend; Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer; Shannon Ridler, The Movie Moxie; Sasha Stone, Awards Daily; Ella Taylor, LA Weekly

Some answered the questions, some gave other quotes and thoughts.

Manohla Dargis:

I’m just glad that Bigelow has received this initial recognition. There’s really not much more that can be said on this subject until she actually wins.

Jan Lisa Huttner:

Although the number of noms is the same the quality of these noms is very different.  With the exception of Best Picture & Best Director, AVATAR’s noms are all technical, whereas noms for THE HURT LOCKER include the major categories of BEST ACTOR & BEST ORIGINAL SCREENPLAY.  (Major/Minor being determined by what gets announced on Nominations Morning versus what just goes out in the press release for Oscar junkies like us.)  In this respect, ROTTEN TOMATOES is an accurate guide.  As of today, AVATAR stands @ 82% Fresh whereas THE HURT LOCKER stands @ 97% Fresh, way ahead of all other candidates qualitatively speaking.

I’m especially pleased that Jeremy Renner was nominated because his face in close-up is the core image in THE HURT LOCKER & I think Kathryn Bigelow directed him brilliantly.  I have some hope that the 9 noms will make more people see his extraordinary performance now that THE HURT LOCKER is a top contender beyond the best director barrier-buster.  Momentum for THE HURT LOCKER will surely build as more people see it, & if a significant number of voters decide to “vote the ticket,” he just might squeak thru.  One lives in hope!

This is a break-through year for women characters, & in particular, this should be appreciated as “the year of the woman as teacher.”  Look at the all the contenders again & you’ll see this thread running through almost all of this year’s “female-oriented” noms.  Who saves Precious?  Ms. Rain!  Who saves Jenny?  Miss Stubbs!  (See more on this below.)  Who are Leigh Anne Tuohy’s key allies: Miss Sue (Kathy Bates) & Mrs. Boswell (Kim Dickens).

If I ruled the world, contenders would have included BRIGHT STAR, JULIE & JULIA, and THE LOVELY BONES.  Me, I nominated UP IN THE AIR for the Women Film Critics Circle’s “Hall of Shame Award,” & to call it “an adaptation” of Walter Kirns’ book is ludicrous.

I have BRIGHT STAR as a Top Contender in my own BEST ADAPTED SCREENPLAY category.  Whether you agree with me on this or not, I sincerely believe that BRIGHT STAR stands in much closer relation to Andrew Motion’s KEATS Bio than the “adaptation” of Walter Kirns’ novel in the UP IN THE AIR screenplay.  But bottom line, in this particular category I am simply thrilled that Nick Hornby was nominated for AN EDUCATION!!!  His screenplay opens with Miss Stubbs, closes with Miss Stubbs, & has Miss Stubbs mention the name “Mr. Rochester” THREE TIMES in between, so shame on anyone who’s surprised to learn that David “has secrets” in Act Three!!!

But here’s a fact that’s more important: Meryl Streep has not won an Oscar in 26 years!!!  Yet again, critics have used her brilliance primarily to damn her collaborators (in this case Amy Adams & Nora Ephron)–what’s up with that?!?  If they’re going to reward Jeff Bridges for CRAZY HEART then for sure, they should NOT “yawn” about Streep this year & pass her over yet again. (And I say this also having loved all the other contenders).

The Bigelow nomination means EVERYTHING!!!  Another huge crack in the celluloid ceiling!!!  Do not buy into the BS: Bigelow’s films have often included strong supporting women’s roles not to mention two wonderful female leads (Jamie Leigh Curtis in BLUE STEEL & Sara Polley in THE WEIGHT OF WATER).  Most offensive: Embedding in the gossipy “Exes Issue” is the not so subtle implication that she’s riding on Cameron’s coat tails.  Those of us who know better must fight back!!!  Yes, she’s a babe.  Yes, she’s got great legs.  Yes, she was once married to James Cameron.  But, guess what: THE HURT LOCKER is a riveting film that’s 97% Fresh, Bigelow has Lifetime Achievement, & oh yes, women hold up half the sky! Continue reading ‘Women Writers React to the Oscar Nominations’

This morning I have such a feeling of relief over Kathryn Bigelow’s nomination.  Since the Academy has such a shitty track record of honoring women, I thought in back of my mind that they just might give her (and us) the big finger.

But those thoughts have now been displaced, and the good news is that she got nominated.  The better news is that her film, The Hurt Locker — a film directed by a woman — got the same amount of nominations as Avatar — 9. I’m gonna go out on a limb (not very far out though) and say that no other female directed film has ever garnered that many nomination.

But in my joy and relief, I am still reminded of how far we have to go when I got these headlines in my in box describing the nominations:

From CNN: “Avatar,” “Up in the Air” among leading nominees at this year’s Academy Award nominations.”

From the Hollywood Reporter: “James Cameron, ‘Avatar’ among Oscar nominees”

The Hurt Locker got more noms than Up in the Air and was equal to Avatar.  So why doesn’t it rate a headline?

I know I’m nit picking but come on, when is this going to happen again?  When is a movie that is directed by a woman going to match nomination for nomination to the man who calls himself the king of the world?

So beyond her nod for directing which is momentous, lets look at the bigger picture in that her leadership, and yes it is leadership (which is always one of the reasons why women have a hard time with directing — men can’t see them as leading the troops aka the crew) has been rewarded with NINE nominations.

Continue reading ‘Early Thoughts on the Oscar Nominations’

When I saw this picture I tried to come up with my idea of what these two awesome women said to each other on the red carpet at the Screen Actor’s Guild Awards this past Saturday.  Every scenario I wrote was so lame that I can’t post them.  Any of you comedy writers have a good idea?

BTW, Tina took home the trophy for best comedy actress and Meryl was denied the best actress is a film by the juggernaut that has become Sandra Bullock.

What do you think they said to each other?

photo h/t Jezebel

If you are a Nancy Meyers fan the good news for you is that It’s Complicated will make you happy, but if you have issues with Nancy Meyers and her filmmaking style this one won’t sway you her way.  It’s Complicated is pure Nancy Meyers for better or for worse.  Meyers gives us another aging white, rich baby boomer woman at a crossroads in her life.  Meryl Streep plays Jane Adler the owner of a spectacular bakery in Santa Barbara whose youngest has just graduated from college.  On the trip to NYC to attend her son’s graduation she winds up in bed with her ex, Jake played with lusty hysterics by Alec Baldwin.

Jane becomes unmoored by this turn of events.  She had become comfortable in her life.  She has her friends, she has her kids, she has her work, she about to get a new HUGE addition put on her house that she’s been saving up for for years.  But while she’s content, she’s not really happy and Jake, the guy who left her for a younger woman pushes all the right buttons and she becomes unglued.

What Meyers is able to do is to ask some questions about women’s roles, expectations and disappointments.  She doesn’t challenge anything or put a political spin on it.  She gives us a person who followed the blueprint of a woman of her race and class, married  the guy, had three kids, took care of the family and then like so many other women like her, got left behind for a younger woman.

The thing that you need to be reminded of during this dance of Streep and Baldwin is just how bad the divorce was.  And it’s the kids (now in their 20s) who are the ones not understanding this renewed friendship between their parents.  These are the kids who clearly remember the times when their dad wasn’t allowed in the house.  They are confused, and Zoe Kazan says say eloquently as Gabby, the middle child “I am very damaged from the divorce.”

So even though Jane has had 10 years to get over it, she still has residual anger.  Who can blame her?  But the thing is, she’s not the same person she was a decade before and doesn’t want to revert back to that woman and those habits which you can see is very easy to do.

Baldwin as Jake, sees Jane differently than he did when he left and also sees an independent, adult woman who’s not amped up on hormones wanting to have a baby.  But Jane doesn’t let him off the hook and says, “isn’t a baby part of the package when you marry a woman her age?”  Baldwin is great as a guy who just wants his life to be easy again.  He feels he can ease back into Jane’s life and while he has changed (a bit) in their 10 years apart, she has grown exponentially and they clearly just “don’t fit” anymore.

Streep is able to show Jane’s confusion with the excitement over her personal sexual revolution with her ex-husband to her utter horror over the fact that she is the one having an affair with a married man.  It’s the small gestures by Streep when she is alone that convey Jane’s emotions and nobody NOBODY does it better.

Steve Martin plays third prong in the love triangle and I have never seen him as retrained on screen.  He plays a man who has been bitterly devastated in a divorce and is desperate to find some normalcy in his life.  He likes Jane because she’s an adult and says that her age is one of the things that he finds attractive about her.  (When is the last time you heard that in a movie?)

But there are a bunch of things that bothered me in the film.  The tone deafness about the economy is a big one.  It just kinds of seems in your face.  Everything is white and plush, the people are all white and skinny and it just seems kind of off.

But then I need to remember that this is a Nancy Meyers film.  She makes films for a certain type of woman.  The thing is there are lots of baby boomer women out there who will wistfully look at this film and be able to relate to certain aspects of it.  If enough of them go to see it, it will be a hit.

While being interviewed by the Guardian for her film Nowhere Boy about the teenage years of John Lennon, Kristin Scott Thomas talked about her life and her career and had some very interesting things to say.

The moment that Kristin Scott Thomas knew she didn’t want to be a typical movie star, the moment it seems she switched from playing romantic leads to infinitely more interesting roles, was when a director told her she should make her character more appealing. The idea didn’t grab her. “I just thought, I don’t want to do that,” she says. “I don’t want to have to be pretty. I don’t want to have to be adorable. Because if I’m watching that on screen I get irritated.” She sits back with a sigh. “I can’t bear it.”

But [in general] I don’t want to just be a kind of bouncing board for men to flex their muscles and look brave and courageous and understanding, while I just look bleary-eyed in the background. No, I don’t want to do that. You can also do leading roles that are riveting, but they tend to be – well, certainly in my world – they’re the lower-budget, more arthouse films, because I’m not on the right list to be asked to do those really great meaty roles that you see Meryl Streep or Cate Blanchett doing.”

She has made a brilliant career for herself in France, where she isn’t so typecast, plays far fewer aristocrats, and “can let rip a bit”. By working there, she seems to have avoided the mid-life canyon that many Hollywood actresses fall into, because the French film industry “loves middle-aged women. They love us! They think we’re sexy.” I suggest that other actresses need to learn French. “No!” she says. “Keep away. Not on my patch. There are quite a lot of actresses who can speak really good French. Emma Thompson. Jodie Foster. Cate Blanchett. Keep out.

I find her honesty about life and acting very brave.

Kristin Scott Thomas: ‘I’ve been a very sad person, but I’m not any more’ (The Guardian)

PS- Forgot that she signed the petition supporting Roman Polanski…Not a good thing.

After the Golden Globe nominations, I reached out to several women who write and think about films to get their sense of the stories that came out of the nominations.

The issues that I wanted to hear other people’s thoughts on what I saw coming out of the nominations:

• Meryl vs Meryl
• Kathryn Bigelow
• The return of Sandra Bullock
• Nora (Ephron) vs. Nancy (Meyers)
• Women over 40 rule acting nods
• Bright Star missing
• An Education, no best picture

The woman who participated included: Sasha Stone, Awards Daily; Thelma Adams, Us Weekly; Anne Thompson, Thompson on Hollywood; Monika Bartyzel, Cinematical; Caryn James, film critic Marie Claire; Carrie Rickey, Philadelphia Inquirer; Ella Taylor, LA Weekly; Katey Rich, Cinemablend; Jan Lisa Huttner, The Hot Pink Pen; Susan Wloszczyna, USA Today; Jenni Miller, Cinematical.

Thanks so much to all the participants.

Sasha Stone

I’m a bit horrified that Jane Campion’s Bright Star was ignored.  On the other hand, it is an extremely competitive year for women and in that way, be careful what you wish for.  The one woman who is playing in the big leagues, Kathryn Bigelow, didn’t direct a gender-based film at all; in fact, her film, like most of her films, is all about the men.

But who’s to say a woman shouldn’t feel free to direct a film about anyone?  Men, women, aliens, politicians – women should have an open playing field.

Nora vs. Nancy is funny – both women kind of corner the market on funny films about older women looking for identity and love.  And there is Meryl Streep smack dab in the middle. Having them both there is call for celebration.

Bright Star is an odd film, not easily sold or packaged.  It didn’t get enough momentum out of the festival circuit and not the fault of the publicity team who worked day and night to get that film the exposure it needed.   Campion’s refusal to make Bright Star and out and out weepy, combined with its distant romantic tale, fought off the very audience it would need to survive: romance-hungry women.  How awful to have it categorized like that but that is what women want.

Campion, however, is an auteur.  Her films will last long after many of the films in play today are merely footnotes.  She in uncompromising and that makes her a powerful force in filmmaking in general, not just in “women’s filmmaking.”  This year is an exceptional leap forward.  One hopes it doesn’t get rolled up and put into a stupid theory that films directed by women don’t win awards unless they’re about men.  That would be a shame.

Finally, it’s a mistake to confuse quality of filmmaking with success in the awards race.  One is a game, the other is art.

Thelma Adams

Here’s another: Vera versus Anna.  Don’t you wish Anna would gracefully bow out so that this terrific veteran actress who really soars in Up in the Air has a chance at best supporting actress?

As for Meryl versus Meryl — this is a speed bump.  It won’t happen at the Oscars where Meryl will be nominated for Julie & Julia — and has a very good chance to take the Oscar.

I LOVE Bright Star but it was a tough sell…..Jane Campion is making brilliant movies, but not movies for the masses.

I so LOVE Marion Cotillard’s nomination — she is the brilliant heart of NINE.  Imagine the movie if all the casting had been equal to hers.

Anne Thompson

What I think happened with Bright Star is that it opened too early in the season in September and didn’t get any real traction.  It was very well reviewed. The thing that struck me about it, why it would have been overlooked it has a very low key effect.  Jane Campion has made a very subtle, intimate, very precise, very beautiful drama and tragic romance that appeals to women.  It is extremely intimate.  There is nothing hugely dramatic about it.  It almost errs on the side of restraint in a way that I admire and I found it very moving but it doesn’t wow people.  A lot of people find it to be a long and quite meditative – it’s like a beautifully wrought Keats poem.  It didn’t score at the box office, it hasn’t been getting prizes from the critics groups and the Golden Globes also completely overlooked it.  My other theory is that Campion may not have realized this when she went with an unknown cast and really junior key players on her crew, a lot of young crew people, in a funny kind of way I think the Oscars are going to overlook it too.  I pray that she gets recognized for costumes and production design and cinematography but finally it feels like a small movie that a lot of people haven’t seen.

From the beginning I thought that Kathryn Bigelow would be the leading contender in that category and because you have 10 best picture slots it’s possible that An Education would get in there remote possibility that It’s Complicated or Julie & Julia would get in there.  But in the director category you only have five and my sense is that there will only one woman getting in there.  But she could win.  I’m very optimistic that the time has come for everybody to come through for Kathryn Bigelow.  People are jumping on the fact that she is competing with her ex-husband, and that’s really not the story.  The fact is that Cameron himself respects her is a big deal.  You have to be pretty great to stand up to Jim Cameron, and he absolutely respects her.

It’s Complicated, The Hurt Locker, Julia & Julia, The Proposal and An Education all did very well with the Golden Globe nominations.  That’s a pretty strong list of women’s pictures.

Sandra Bullock is an interesting siituation where I suspect the Golden Globes came through for her in a way the Oscars may not.  But people are writing about The Blind Side and it has done well at the box office.  The best actress category isn’t as strong as it might be.  We are going to see Gabourey Sidibe, Carey Mulligan, Helen Mirren, Meryl Streep probably for Julie & Julia.  There is a fifth slot there.  Is it going to go to Emily Blunt?  Is it going to Bullock?  Is it going to go to Cotilliard?  These are the contenders for that spot.

Nora Ephron v Nancy Meyers – first of all remember that the Globes have a comedy and musical category.  Without that category they wouldn’t be there.  It’s Complicated, The Proposal and Julie & Julia are considered on some level romantic comedies (not really Julie & Julia) and they don’t do well at the Oscars.  There are a lot of people in the muscial/comedy category who will not show up on Oscar morning.

I couldn’t miss the opportunity to ask Anne if she noticed anything different this  year with the success of female centric films at the box office.

I have been covering the question of hollywood and the women’s audience and women directors for a very long time.  If you’re a screenwriter you have a better shot so Nancy Meyers and Nora Ephron have made their way by virtue of being screnwriters as well as directors.  Bigelow has made her way outside of the so-called women’s genre and she’s managed to make her way as an action director and that’s one of the reapsns why she’s so strong.

I don’t have a sense that Hollywood is jumping up and down to create more projects for women.  What may be going on is that they have to learn that lesson over and over again with the audience thirsty and starving for good women’s fare.  In some ways Manohla (Dargis) is right.  Even though it looks like they are doing well, the studios are not supportive.  They don’t count on women to show up on opening weekend unless it’s a branded entertainment like Twilight, Sex and the City or Mamma Mia.

Monika Bartyzel

While writers like Nikki Finke have called the Golden Globes “completely meaningless,” I found myself inspired and hopeful because of Up in the Air. Not only did Clooney get a nod, but also Vera Farmiga and Anna Kendrick. While someone in the Women Film Critics Circle certainly didn’t like Farmiga’s character, these were two of my favourite female characterizations this year. Each had a few big flaws to ignore (like Kendricks’ ridiculous mid-movie meltdown), but overall, they were women I could really relate to, regardless of age and place in life. With the film getting so much love, I hope it inspires more successful and balanced women on the big screen.

Women Over 40 — It’s great, but the cynic in me wonders if this is only because these women are aging so slowly that no one believes their real ages — that Hollywood can forget that they are, indeed, over 40.

Meryl — She’s definitely worthy for Julie & Julia, she stunningly brought Julia Child to life, but I would’ve liked to see someone else take the other spot. I’ve already noticed complaints of Streep overkill, and she is becoming the safe bet. Since (500) Days was included, maybe Zooey Deschanel to go with Levitt.

Caryn James

I don’t want to take anything away from Kathryn Bigelow; The Hurt Locker is an amazingly-directed film. But it is also a stereotypically macho film, while Jane Campion’s beaufitul, poetic Bright Star plays into stereotypes of what a woman filmmaker might do. It’s true that awards rarely honor subtlety, male or female, and that has hurt Bright Star. But it’s also true that the many nominations for Bigelow play into the old idea that women get ahead by behaving like men, in this case making a movie voters might expect a man to have made. I’m glad Bigelow made the film she wanted to make, but real progress will come when we stop looking at poetic films as if they exist in some lesser, female category.

Carrie Rickey

The only thing you’re missing is Kathryn Bigelow vs. her ex husband Jim Cameron in best pic and director race.  I think the Cameron/Bigelow noms are an excellent illustration of the dif between studio epic and intimate indie and the weirdness of comparing apples to mangoes when it comes to awards.  My principal thought at looking at the Streep, Ephron and Meyers nods is that we’re seeing an illustration of the creative second wind of women of a certain age — what anthropologist Margaret Mead called “post-menopausal zest.”

Ella Taylor

My only comment (as a Brit) is that An Education, a perfectly presentable, perfectly unremarkable film that would do nicely as a television drama, didn’t remotely deserve best picture. But Rosamund Pike, relatively unsung as the blond ditz, certainly deserves a nomination for best supporting actress.

Katey Rich

Meryl vs. Meryl– This doesn’t really seem to be a contest to me. It’s Complicated is such a dud that Meryl should easily be able to win for Julie & Julia. Even though all the buzz is about Sandra Bullock having this comeback year and all, the potential spoiler to watch is probably Marion Cotillard, who is by far the best part of Nine. I still think it’s a supporting role, though, so that could damage her chances.

Kathryn Bigelow– You go girl. She swept the critic’s awards over the weekend and is very much poised as a Best Director frontrunner. The more people who talk up her chances to be the first-ever female Best Director winner, the more it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy that she’ll win.  And it’s not like it’s just some token “time for a woman to win” award– that would never have gotten her so far.  She made an amazing film and is getting rightly rewarded for it.  It’s ridiculous that it’s taken this long for it to happen, but I’ll take it!

Sandra Bullock– I haven’t seen The Blind Side yet, but I’m pretty iffy on awarding for performances in really mediocre movies, which is what I hear about this one. However, more power to her for having such a comeback in her 40s– she and Meryl Streep need to start giving lessons. It’s hilarious, though, that everyone has completely forgotten the existence of All About Steve. I saw that movie! I will not forget!

Nora vs. Nancy– It’s Complicated had a truly, truly awful screenplay, and while Julie & Julia wasn’t exactly a masterpiece of writing, I would have much preferred seeing it get the screenplay nomination instead. But hey, District 9 was co-written by a woman, and it got a completely out-of-the-blue nomination, so that’s pretty cool.

Women over 40– I wouldn’t say they “rule” the acting nods, exactly– there’s plenty of hot young things in there (Anna Kendrick, Carey Mulligan, Gabby Sidibe, Penelope Cruz, Vera Farmiga even is just 36) that make it pretty status quo. Julia Roberts’ nomination, though, thrilled me– Duplicity was so, so great and was quickly forgotten once it was a flop. She wasn’t revelatory in that movie or anything, and I’m sure the Globes went for her for their much-beloved starpower, but I’m glad to see someone else remembers that movie.

Bright Star– It’s a shame that this movie has utterly fallen off the radar, since Abbie Cornish really was remarkable in it, and Jane Campion at least deserves to be part of the conversation. I think it will be back in the Cinematography department come Oscar time, but sadly Bright Star seems to be one of those victims of the December release glut.

An Education– I can’t figure out why this seems to have fallen off the radar except for Carey Mulligan, though a friend of mine has a theory that it only seems to have disappeared in the fast-moving online world. Basically, there was only room for 5 Dramas at the Globes, but only one of the Comedy/Musical nominees (Nine) seems likely to make it at the Oscars, so there’s room for An Education to come back. They need to come back with the marketing campaign though. Maybe if they had sent me a screener I’d be talking about it more.

Jan Lisa Huttner

Bright Star missing: As I told you back in July, Melissa, men do NOT get this film & they’re actively pissed that it’s told from Fanny’s POV (that is, that is it NOT told from Keats’ POV).  Did you see that execrable “review” in recent NY Review of Books?!?  Oy!!!

An Education no best picture: Again, guys don’t really get this picture & they totally missed all the Mr. Rochester references in Acts 1 & 2, which I why I asked Women Critics Circle members to add new “Invisible Woman” category for Olivia Williams as “Miss Stubbs.”  Sure enough, when I received my Chgo Film Critics Assoc ballot, Olivia Williams wasn’t even offered as a candidate for Best Supporting Actress!!!  Oy!!!

I loathed Up in the Air.  Also, saw INGLORIOUS BASTERDS & hated it.  Saw INVICTUS & shook my head in despair–this is the best we can do for Nelson Mandela: a rugby movie?!?  Saw PRECIOUS & liked it but didn’t love it.  Having spent most of my life as a fat girl, I just didn’t believe the fantasy sequences.

Susan Wloszczyna

Well, I sensed Bright Star was frizzling quite soon after Toronto. They went crazy for it at Cannes but it quickly lost momentum. Once it opened, the reviews were mixed and the box office weak. And that was all she said.  Too bad — I root for Jane Campion since she is one of a kind and a true artist. That butterfly scene alone is worth an Oscar. But I think it was the wrong kind of movie at the wrong time, as good as Abbie Cornish was.

It is interesting about An Education being left out because it is such a smart, savvy film with a fine ensemble cast that outshines most crappy female-driven romcooms. But Carey seems to be the only story there now.

Just like people love Robert Downey Jr. and Meryl, they totally love Sandra Bullock. The fact that she gave two great performances in one year in decent enough movies is reason for celebration. Us Sandy fans have been waiting for her to get back on track for ages.

Jenni Miller:

I’m disappointed that An Education didn’t get a best picture nomination, but I do think the others were deserving. My feelings about Up in the Air aren’t as strong as others writers’, though.

I cannot believe that Bright Star didn’t get any nominations. Abbie Cornish, Jane Campion’s direction, the cinematography, the way she wove his poetry into the music — Bright Star was dazzling. Emily Blunt was good in The Young Victoria, but I thought the movie itself was fairly mediocre.

Meryl is amazing, of course. I haven’t seen It’s Complicated (although I would certainly like to!), so I can’t comment on that, and I did think she was great in Julie and Julia, but were 2009 comedies really that dry for actresses? What about Rachel Weisz in The Brothers Bloom, one of my favorite movies? What about any of the women in Whip It?

The Proposal is a guilty pleasure romcom, and as for Duplicity, I watched it on a plane. It’s a double-edged sword, as Monika wrote, about supporting women writers/directors/actors — I’m glad that women over 40 whom I enjoy in general are getting nominated, but they’re not for roles that blow me away, or even qualify (in my mind) as more thansomething I’d catch on DVD.

I can’t decide if that category is so blah because of what’s out there or because of the voters. I feel as though there’s something I’m overlooking.

By now everyone has seen the Manohla Dargis’ piece in the NY Times Women in the Seats but Not Behind the Camera which is a solid but late to the party piece about how even though women are buying tickets they still have few opportunities to direct.  I guess people care more about the lack of directors this year because a) women are actually making a difference at the box office and must be reckoned with, and b) for the first time a woman could potentially take home the best director statuette at the Oscars.

It’s not news to me or anyone who reads this site that women have been full and equal participants at the box office buying 50% of the tickets (according to MPAA stats).  And according to a piece in The Wrap last week, women won the battle at the box office this year, Look Who’s Winning the B.O. Battle of the Sexes:

“This is the year of the woman,” Paul Dergarabedian, a box-office analyst with Hollywood.com, told TheWrap. “Female stars or female-driven movies have been unexpectedly dominant. I mean, Meryl Streep is just as vital today as ever.”

But here is where the disconnect comes in.  Women buy tickets, yet still don’t get directing gigs.  As Dargis writes:

Women need to develop their own muscles.  I’m not talking about those buff babes who pop up in adolescent fantasies, licking their lips as they lock and load; I’m talking about movies made for and with women. I’m also talking about movies directed by women.

Why is it so hard for women to get the gigs?  Women spend the money to go to film school and want to direct, yet for reasons that no one has really figured out how to assess (because hardly anyone will talk on the record about it) women do not get the big studio directing gigs.  They just don’t.  You can blame it the old boy’s club.  You can say that men don’t want to see the type of movies women direct.  You can call it whatever you want.  But to me it’s plain old bullshit sexism.  For some reason the studio executives — male and female — don’t want to buy what women have to sell.

If we as women (and men) went out and supported films like Whip It the studios would make more of them.  Nobody went to see Whip It which was an awesome film.  We can blame that on marketing issues but if we don’t go see the good films by women the studios won’t make them.  It’s really simple and yes it is a double standard.  We need to support films by women more than we need to support the film by men.  That’s just the way it is.

Here are some more of the depressing stats:

Of the almost 600 new movies that will be reviewed in The New York Times by the end of 2009, about 60 were directed by women, or 10 percent.

Of the major and mini major studios, here’s what women have directed in 2009:
20th Century Fox: Jennifer’s Body (Karyn Kusama) and Alvin and the Chipmunks: The Squeakquel (Betty Thomas)
Fox Searchlight: Amelia (Mira Nair), Post Grad (Vicky Jenson) and Whip It (Drew Barrymore)
Disney: The Proposal (Anne Fletcher)
Sony: Julie & Julia (Nora Ephron)
Sony Pictures Classics: An Education (Lone Scherfig), Coco Before Chanel (Anne Fontaine) and Sugar (Anna Boden, directing with Ryan Fleck).
Universal Pictures: It’s Complicated (Nancy Meyers)

Miramax Films, Focus Features, Paramount Pictures and Warner Brothers Pictures released no films directed by a woman.

Look Who’s Winning the B.O. Battle of the Sexes (The Wrap)

Women in the Seats but Not Behind the Camera (NY Times)

Here’s what she had to say about her great year:

“Sexism is everywhere. Ageism is everywhere. But you know know what? It’s about making money. Look at what Sarah Jessica Parker did with Sex and the City. Look at what Meryl Streep is doing” — she pauses to laugh — “every other week! The proof is in the pudding. I didn’t have the ‘Oh my God, I’m not working because I’m 40.’ I was working when I was 40. I’ve never had this many opportunities in my lifetime.”

Magazine hits the newsstands today.

Sandra Bullock Soars (EW)

The Hollywood Reporter’s Steven Zeitchik has a recent piece about how small the pool is this year for Best Actress.

He talks about how the top three potential nominees are Meryl Streep (Julie & Julia), Carey Mulligan (An Education), Gabourey Sidibe (Precious), with other contenders being Abbie Cornish (Bright Star), Emily Blunt (The Young Victoria), Helen Mirren (The Last Station), Saoirse Ronan (The Lovely Bones), Penelope Cruz (Broken Embraces), Hilary Swank (Amelia) and god forbid Sandra Bullock (The Blind Side).  Bullock’s potential inclusion to Zeitchik is indicative of the shallow pool.  (Let’s remember that Julia Roberts had never done anything remotely like Erin Brockovich before she hit that one out of the park.)

The piece goes on to say that there are many men jostling for those top five slots and if there were 10 nominations some would still be left out.

No shit.  Most movies, even the awards movies are made by guys for guys.

Here’s Zeitchik’s reasoning as to why women are so woefully underrepresented:

It’s axiomatic that older actresses who want to play strong lead roles often have to abandon features for venues like cable TV. Awards season has a way of reinforcing the point. During the 1980s, three women older than 50 won the best actress Oscar, while a fourth (Shirley MacLaine) was about to turn 50.

During the past 20 years, on the other hand, exactly one fiftysomething woman has taken the prize (Helen Mirren, for “The Queen”).

That’s far from a comment on this generation’s talent or even on the preferences of voters. But it does say plenty about the roles women are offered.

But it also highlights that, for all the strides made by the women behind the camera, the women in front of them can still be subject to the old prejudices. Indeed, the more cynical in town — including at least one actress awards-contender — say that the director and actress trends are hardly a coincidence. Many female directors, they argue, can feel pressure to cast a preponderance of strong male leads to negate the perception that theirs is a female-oriented film.

Yes, this is a good year for women directors as I have written about many times, but I don’t want the conversation to be that, just because we have several potential contenders for year-end awards, our work is done.  Women directors have a harder time getting traction.  Let’s remember that.

But what this story reminded me of is all the strong female Oscar-worthy performances that don’t ever make it onto the Oscar radar screen because they don’t have wide enough distribution or get killed by the mostly male critical establishment.  Movies that star guys get distributed more widely than movies by and about women.  That said, it makes sense to look beyond all the films getting the buzz to some films whose distributors can’t afford to mount Oscar campaigns or maybe even send out screeners.

Just because a film or a performance doesn’t get included in the “buzz” doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be.

Here are some performances worthy of being considered:

Amy Adams- Sunshine Cleaning

Michelle Pfeiffer- Cheri

Nicole Beharie – American Violet

Shohreh Aghdashloo – The Stoning of Soraya M.

Tilda Swinton- Julia

Audrey Tatou- Coco Before Chanel

Michelle Monaghan- Trucker

Yolande Moreau- Seraphine

Catalina Saavedra- The Maid

Sophie Okondeo- Skin

Robin Wright- The Private Lives of Pippa Lee

Charlize Theron – The Burning Plain

Update: Forgot One: Kerry Fox- Storm

Shallow Pool for Oscar’s Actress Contenders (Hollywood Reporter)

Jeers to the Hollywood Reporter for convening a year end discussion with high-profile producers round-table without a SINGLE WOMAN!  Please don’t tell me a single female producer was not available.

Here are two points, from the conversation of note:

Laurence Mark: on How Julie & Julie got made:

Mark: “Julie & Julia” happened, without question, because of Meryl Streep. We all know it, Meryl knows it, Sony is certainly happy to say it.

And Ivan Reitman talking about casting Vera Farmiga and the discussion he had with his son writer/director Jason.

I’d say the biggest disagreement we had was over Vera Farmiga, who is a wonderful actress but she was eight months pregnant about two months before he started shooting. He said “Look, I wrote it for her, I think she’ll be perfect.” And she was as big as a house! As a producer, I have to say to him, “I know she’s a great actress, she’s going to be great in it, but she’s got to be someone George Clooney is going to fall in love with.” There were all kinds of actresses who wanted to play this part, bigger names than Vera was at that moment, so I kept saying, “Well, how about her?” But he just hung in there. I had to really defend his decision, and I know he agonized about it enormously. There were a couple rough opening scenes — first days — that he reshot at the end of the schedule to give her a little more time to get into shape. Apart from that, there was really no downside.

Thank goodness Jason stuck to his guts.

And our second jeer of the day goes to CNN and this story, When Actresses Turn Ugly which is basically about the fact that Mariah Carey wore no makeup for her part in Precious.  How does wearing no makeup make you ugly?  Unacceptable.

Awards Watch: Producers Roundtable (Hollywood Reporter)

When Actresses Turn Ugly (CNN)

I love when I get my Entertainment Weekly preview issues.  Just love them.  This year’s holiday movie preview just arrived and lo and behold it looks like it could be a pretty decent season for us women.

The season has already begun with Oscar frontrunner Precious, but when the cover gives me a picture of Meryl Streep and Alec Baldwin in a Nancy Meyers flick, I am happy.  It’s Complicated opens on December 25 and I for one cannot wait to see it.  It’s looks to be Something’s Gotta Give but even better.

I am also psyched for Sandra Bullock’s new film (she has been busy this year) The Blind Side based on the Michael Lewis book.  It’s about a white couple from Memphis who take in a homeless very large African-American teenager and makes him a part of their family.  Here’s the description: “A cross-pollination of heart warming family film and rousing sports movie, with a little Erin Brockovich social consciousness thrown in…”  My kind of movie.  Sounds like this film can get the guys and the girls.

The whispers are starting about Bullock’s performance (haven’t seen it yet) as Oscar material but she shuns that kind of conversation.

“People who do what I do don’t do award winning films…which is kind of a relief…I’d rather roll home, put on the jeans, go outside, pick up dog poop, or go for a run or something.”

Another reason why I love her.  She’d rather pick up dog poop than wear a fancy dress.

Then of course there is juggernaut of Twilight- New Moon which opens opposite The Blind Side and this movie will be HUGE.  (working on a separate post about this.)  I think it will beat Twilight’s 68 million opening weekend numbers.

I’m about to see The Private Lives of Pippa Lee written and directed by Rebecca Miller based on her own novel starring Robin Wright.  Wright who has shed soon to be ex Sean’s last name feels like she has finally gotten a juicy role and she is psyched:

Meryl Streep, Julianne Moore, and the Kates have all gotten great roles, and were so good in them, and now I got one…I finally got one.

Here’s a little shout out to the adorable Anna Kendrick who at 24 really holds her own opposite George Clooney in Up in the Air.  Here’s what she said that got me loving her:

My character is so rare.  She doesn’t have sex with anybody.  She doesn’t revolve around the boy.  She’s smart and complicated and really messed up.

She knows the it may be a while because she gets another character like this, which incidentally writer/director Jason Reitman wrote with her in mind.

I’m going to have to deal with a lot of characters that revolve around a guy or just aren’t that well-rounded.

Isn’t it sad that a 24 year old knows that she may have already have gotten the best part of her career already?  Hopefully, that’s not true since based on her performance and the Oscar buzz, she’s going to be around a long, long time.

Other movies (including some that star guys) I am looking forward to over these next couple of months include: Avatar; A Single Man; The Lovely Bones; Nine; Invictus; Brothers; The Last Station; Serious Moonlight; Did You Hear About the Morgans?; The Young Victoria and The Loss of a Teardrop Diamond.

What movies are you looking forward to?

There was an interesting column by Tom O’Neil of the LA Times’ Gold Derby about the Oscar hosts.  He reports that according to Meryl Streep’s publicist Leslee Dart, Meryl was not even asked to co-host the show her her upcoming co-stars of It’s Complicated (opening Christmas Day.)

I understand wanting both Steve Martin and Alec Baldwin.  But, they definitely knew they were in the same movie, so they definitely knew that they couldn’t ask Meryl Streep to be  the third co-host because you can’t have all the stars of the same movie hosting the telecast cause that would seem like they were advertising for the movie.  Right?  Do they think that having only two of the stars out of three is not advertising? And anyway who knows if the movie going to a) be any good or b) be Oscar worthy and c) still around at all when the Oscars are broadcast.

I don’t know if Meryl would have been interested in the co-hosting duties anyway since she doesn’t seem the type, but she never got the chance to think about it.

Come on.

Maybe they were banking on getting Tina Fey who has great rapport with Martin and we know how awesome she is with Alec Baldwin every week on 30 Rock.  The rumors are she said no that she is too busy.  Duh.  But the point I am trying to to make is that we still live in a world where having two male hosts is fine and everyone thinks is a great idea but no one would ever think that having two female hosts would be acceptable.

Not so complicated: Meryl Streep wasn’t asked to join costars as Oscars co-hosts (LA Times)

There must be something in the water because over the last week there have been several substantive pieces and one panel (which I will blog about later) discussing women and film.  These discussions are not new, they happen all the time, but having two pieces come out in major newspapers like the Washington Post and the NY Times on the same day makes one take note. Why now?  Who knows?  Maybe it’s because there are several women’s names at play for best director.  Maybe it has to do with the release of the Shriver Report on the state of women.  I don’t care about the reason, I’m just glad we are talking.

What I like about these conversations is the anger they are inciting.  People are pissed.  Why are women still being marginalized?  We are over 50% of the population, we buy 50% of the tickets.  We spend money.  We want to see movies by and about women, as well as seeing movies by and about men.  I’m not asking for special treatment, just decent treatment.  That shouldn’t be too much to ask.

In Ann Hornaday’s piece Women & Film: With female characters, why does Hollywood fear that the stronger they are, the harder they fail? in the Washington Post (which I am quoted in) she makes the argument that strong women are out at the movies.  I agree with Ann but I will add that you can still see strong women in smaller dramas released by indies that will never make it to the multiplex near you.  So if you want to see a strong woman on film, you need to probably live in NY or LA or another major city if you are lucky.  Most other people (which is basically everyone) can only find these women on netflix (if they know what they are looking for.)  That totally sucks.  Here’s what producer Lynda Obst said:

Dramas are dead, Some of the greatest parts for women — the Academy Award parts for women — are often in dramas, and this is the worst time for dramas since I’ve been in the business for the last 10,000 years.

Lynda Obst knows what’s going on.  She’s in the business of producing dramas and I would imagine she’s thinking about how she’s going to make a living in the future.

And according to Manohla Dargis in her piece Now Starring at the Movies: Famous Dead Women in the NY Times this past Sunday, if you are going to be seen at all on screen as a woman  you need to be dead. That’s such a wonderful feeling for all of us out there.

You can’t blame filmmakers (or actresses) for raiding crypts. It’s rarely been more difficult to be a woman in the movies than now, particularly in the United States, where for the past few decades most blockbusters and microbudgeted D.I.Y. enterprises have been overwhelmingly male.

Dargis who is not known (at least by me) as a champion for women takes it even a step further:

Female stories have become so marginalized on American movie screens, we should be grateful filmmakers are raiding the history books…A woman has to have been legitimized by history, ruled a country, inspired a poet, or ignited a revolution in fashion or cooking to have a shot at some serious screen time. It also helps if she’s played by Meryl Streep.

I do like a historical biopic, but this devaluing of women’s lives and experiences makes me want to hurl.  It’s seems to me that the more power and confidence women gain in real life it is slowly and surely being stripped away on the big screen.  It’s like we are all being punished.  Strong women have been disappearing from movies for some time (not that there were ever that many to begin with) so when we see one like Amelia we all get so excited because it’s like finding water in the desert.  We are starved for these images.  And when they disappoint, they hurt so much worse.  I knew that I would have issues with Amelia.  That didn’t make it hurt any less.  I take my strong women onscreen very seriously cause I know that when they fail, I (and all other women) get screwed.

As Obst said most dramas are now on TV, but I don’t see TV making films like Amelia.  The closest one I’ve seen recently is the Lifetime Georgia O’Keeffe film, and that was just ok..  We see women in dramas on TV shows.  But movies are different.  Even Cate Blanchett’s latest endeavor, a period piece where she was to play Lady Edwina Mountbatten in Indian Summer directed by Joe Wright was shelved.  I’m not going to pretend it’s only women suffering.  When Brad Pitt movies get canceled, things are bad, really bad.

Many people want to escape when they see movies.  But not everyone.  There has to be a diversity of offerings.  At the rate we are going the only films that will be seen are the Transformers type films.  That would be such a shame.

Women & film – With female characters, why does Hollywood fear that the stronger they are, the harder they fail? (Washington Post)

Now Starring at the Movies: Famous Dead Women (NY Times)

Sometimes I don’t know how Forbes comes up with all these lists that they run.  Here is their latest.  Actresses who provide the biggest bang for the buck.

The woman who provides the biggest bang for the buck is Naomi Watts.  She doesn’t star in big movies, and earns around $5 million a picture but she’s been in a bunch of hits which put her in the top position.

Here’s one important assessment:

One thing most of the actresses on this list have in common is that they did not carry the films on their own. In Hollywood, it’s still rare for a woman to be the main star. For the most part, women are co-stars or they appear in ensemble films like He’s Just Not That Into You, which was a surprise hit in February, earning $177 million at the box office worldwide.

A couple of the women on the list get paid the most and provide the biggest bang for the bucks and those include Jennifer Aniston, Meryl Streep, Cate Blanchett and Anne Hathaway.

I haven’t noticed Forbes creating a list like this of male actors.  Why do it for women who make so much less and barely carry any movies?

The list:

Naomi Watt – 44 to 1

Jennifer Connelly – 41 to 1

Rachel McAdams – 30 to 1

Natalie Portman – 28 to 1

Meryl Steep – 27 to 1

Jennifer Aniston – 26 to 1

Halle Berry – 23 to 1

Cate Blanchett – 23 to 1

Anne Hathaway – 23 to 1

Hilary Swank – 23 to 1

Here’s how they came up with the list:

They looked at the 100 biggest stars in Hollywood. To qualify, each actress had to have starred in at least three movies in the past five years that opened in more than 500 theaters.

Best Actresses for the Buck (Forbes.com)

It’s too bad the Meryl Streep’s movies don’t come with action figures or a McDonald’s tie-in…because the woman has the midas touch way beyond the box office.

Here’s some other things that can be attributed to the Streep effect:

- The bump in Greek marriages the month after the release of Mamma Mia (flights were up 13%),

- Increase in cookware sales, cookbooks, and French cooking classes since Julie & Julia.

- Sales of Abba albums soared after Mamma Mia

- The books My Life in France and Julie & Julia are on the NY Times best selling list

- Tourism in Kenya increased after Out of Africa was released in the 80s

- Mrs. Dalloway by Virginia Woolf made it to the best seller list for the first time  after the release of The Hours.

I just love the fact that we are talking about a 60 year old woman with ancillary economic power. Remember boomer women have money and time and LOVE Meryl Streep. If she continues to pick films that are diverse and interesting and continues to show us all how she is enjoying her work and her life she will be successful.

The Streep effect: Why economists love her (The Independent)