Comments on Les Miserables movie — Page 4

Keep in mind there are only two other actors in history who have won three Oscars. That's not to say Day-Lewis won't join the list as #3, but the Academy knows it's honored him twice before. If any voters are on the fence after they see all the nominees, that won't help him win. If he's a clear choice, however, that's different.

---

I would be shocked if anyone turns in a performance better than Tommy Lee Jones's this year for Supporting Actor.

---

Sally Field will NEVER win if they put her in supporting. Leading actress is a weak category this year. (None of the usual suspects have had remarkable films and Field could easily win there.) Hathaway will win supporting actress. She went through so much for the role (think Natalie Portman and Nicole Kidman and Charlize Theron-they like that kind of transformation for a role). Not to mention I think her role is substantial enough to warrant leading actress.

I saw Dreamgirls twice in movie theatres in Los Angeles. Neither were industry screenings. Both times, they applauded after that song.

---

I feel like either Redmayne or Cohen will get a suporting actor nomination. I didnt think Redmayne would get one, but the critical praise about him all weekend has convinced me he has a chance at getting a nomination.
And maybe Carter will sneak into the supporting actress category, mainly because it is a very weak category this year.

Not only is Sally Field's part not big enough for a leading award, it's barely weighty enough for Supporting.

I think she will definitely be nominated for an Oscar, and possibly could win, but one of the major strikes against her is that she's short one or two substantial scenes to put her in a "lock." That has to do with the writing of the character.

It's not necessarily the size of the role, although that helps. Obviously people have won for five minutes of screen work, though. Sally doesn't have one of those scenes like Judi Dench did in Shakespeare in Love when it suddenly becomes "her movie" and the clocks stop on the walls while she's on screen. That's impact, and you can't judge it with a stopwatch.

Sally either needed more screen time or one of those takeover scenes. She has neither, even if she's damn good.

Tommy Lee Jones, on the other hand, has far more screen time AND several take-over-the-picture scenes.

---

best-what she does is more incredible than Dench who didn't deserve the award for a role barely larger than an extra. She has some powerful dialogue with Lincoln and just transforms seamlessly into the role. As I said, leading actress is a rather weak category.

It's about best actor and supporting actress this year.

I think it'll be split between Les Mis and Lincoln.

(I'd hardly be upset if Hawkes pulls off a huge upset.)

That's your right, best. I loved the film but didn't think Dench deserved an Academy Award for that performance. She won because she's a legend who'd never won before. It's politics.

Agree that Sally Field as lead would be ridiculous; it is not at all a leading role.

However, I disagree strongly that the role and the performance are not even arguably weighty enough for a supporting oscar. She has at least three critical scenes and several other very strong ones and she rocks in all of them. Her monologue in which she confronts Tommy Lee Jones alone is a Beatrice Straight=style tour de force; but that is hardly her only triumphant moment in the movie. Add to that that she's Sally Field, had to fight like hell to get the role, gained 25 pounds for it, and, perhaps more importantly to the Academy, worked her butt off (pun intended) to lose it in relatively breakneck speed to look fantastically fit for oscar season - and at her age - and you have a definite oscar contender.

Updated On: 11/25/12 at 02:20 PM

dreaming--I'm not sure how old you are, but Judi Dench wasn't a "legend" when she won for Shakespeare in Love. She was one film into her streak of great film parts, but after she made "A Room With a View" in the '80s, she more or less disappeared from the "global cinema" into Brit-coms and the theatre.

It was her work in Mrs. Brown the year before Shakespeare in Love that first put her into the big league. That was her first Oscar nomination, and she was definitely in the running for the award.

She didn't join the ranks with Maggie Smith and Vanessa Redgrave until after Shakespeare in Love and her win.

She's a legend now, but not then. It was not one of those "I can't believe she's never won an Oscar" scenarios. Aside from A Room With a View, she was known in a couple of Bond flicks for playing "M." That's it ... until Mrs. Brown.

---

Updated On: 11/25/12 at 02:26 PM

As for Jackman- well, it's hard to say. He's certainly well-liked, and charismatic. He can, and will, campaign and work it. But his body of work has been... slight. The Academy may be hesitant to award Jackman, fearing he'll continue to take slight work.

Speculation at this point is largely pointless. Les Mis right now is caught in its pre-release hype mode. It may very well be a triumph. Or it may just merely be... good. And good is fine... but when you're promised a triumph, well..

---

Best12 beat me to it, Judi Dench was largely unknown in the U.S. and had done few films before Mrs. Brown, and was still not all that well known at the time Shakespeare in Love. She was a stage legend, mostly in England, who also had a very successful Brit television career which brought her a small cult following among Americans.

She, Jessica Tandy and to a lesser extent Helen Mirren are proof that sometimes great actresses only become big movie stars when they are well into middle age or beyond it.