E: Some years, the awards group think is so clear and overwhelming as to be boring. Some years, we think we know and are shocked when the inevitable fails to manifest. And then there’s this year, when the precursors show us that we just really don’t know much at all. Three acting categories up in the air? What on earth?
My life is such these days that I don’t have time for my normal level of thoroughness in portraying what’s to come. Perhaps that’s not the worst thing – this is certainly a quicker read than my usual tome. As briefly (but still informatively) as I can present them, here are my thoughts on the wild ride that is the 2023 Oscars.
Best Supporting Actor:
Let’s start with the easy one. No, it’s not assured, but chances are very good that former child star Ke Huy Quan – best known as Short Round from Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom, and Data from The Goonies – will take home the Oscar for his work as many iterations of Waymund Wong in Everything Everywhere, All at Once. He’s received the Golden Globe, The Critics Choice and the Screen Actor’s Guild awards. He’s been charming and disarming award show audiences with his comeback story and his enthusiasm; when you hear him – just as when you first meet striving husband and laundry store owner Waymund Wang – you’re overwhelmed with the desire to hug him, and become his friend and make his life better. The more I hear and read about Quan’s life – he’s been doing the full press tour, so its out there – the stronger that feeling grows. (Seriously, listen to any interview with him about the fanny pack fight scene, or his parents and their flight from Vietnam. Incredible.) He could hardly be a more appealing nominee.
The only major award Ke hasn’t picked up is the BAFTA, which went (shockingly) to fellow first time Oscar nominee and rising local star Barry Keoghan. I say shockingly because going into the season, I expected the fight to be between Quan and grizzled industry vet Brendan Gleeson, Keoghan’s costar in Banshees of Inisherin; if I were voting, I certainly would have had a lot of trouble choosing between Gleeson and Quan. EEAAO doesn’t appear to have connected strongly with the British Academy, which gave its top prize to German WW1 epic All Quiet on the Western Front, which on the one hand makes this loss easy to explain, but on the other is worrisome for proponents of Quan and his film because that group has the biggest membership overlap of any other with the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences.
Still, Quan is the closest thing we have this year to an acting lock. In a year that brought us a wide range of performances (Judd Hirsch received his second nomination for his brief but electric turn as eccentric Uncle Boris in The Fabelmans, while Gleeson, Quan and The Causeway‘s Brian Tyree Henry could be considered co-leads in their films) and more buzzed about performances than could be nominated, Quan stands out.
Best Supporting Actress
Well. This is one is a total doozy. Powerhouse actress Angela Bassett started the season by picking up the Critics Choice and the Golden Globe. Her acceptance speeches were rousing and impassioned. She’s the first actor nominated for any Marvel movie, which is at once exciting for her and the studio, but also a steep mountain still to climb. She’s enormously well respected, and this is her first nomination since What’s Love Got to Do With It. It’s near impossible to say she’s not deserving – but people have asked, is this the role she wins for? If she loses tonight, Bassett could be the victim of high standards set by her own past performances as well as the general prejudice against Marvel and comic book movies.
So who’s left? And we do have to discuss it, because the BAFTA went to Kerry Condon of Banshees. Could she win at Oscar? Sure, even though the Brits have a clear bias for their own stars that’s not always reflected in corresponding Oscar wins. The picture here is complicated by BAFTA’s large overlap with AMPAS, as previously stated – but also by their historic lack of connection with Black American movies, which sometimes indicates a similar lack of support on this side of the Atlantic (Ma Rainey’s Black Bottom) and sometimes doesn’t. Condon didn’t keep her frontrunner status for long, however; she was immediately supplanted by “original NEPO baby” Jamie Lee Curtis at the SAG awards.
We have to discuss a few things about the SAG awards. First, SAG is enormous. While AMPAS has actors as its largest subgroup, AMPAS is still such a small group that it’s hard to make inferences from the will of the larger body like SAG. When their picks differ from the general awards season trajectory, SAG chooses more diverse performances and edgier films than Oscar, but only occasionally does this translate into a actual boost to the top of Oscar’s podium (think Parasite). SAG’s embrace of the performances and not just the ensemble of EEAAO isn’t meaningless – the question is how much it means.
Fans of EEAAO might wonder why Curtis, whose multiple roles (while varied and hilarious) don’t necessarily have the emotional impact of costar and fellow nominee Stephanie Hsu’s work as Quan and Michelle Yeoh’s daughter. Of course Curtis’ many years and many friends in the industry explain part of this – Hollywood loves being able to crown a beloved veteran when the right role comes along – but there’s another factor at work, too. Despite Bassett’s incredible speech at the Globes, the moment from that show most people remember – and have memed and shared – is Jamie Lee Curtis’ explosive joy at costar Michelle Yeoh’s surprise best actress win. If Curtis wins tonight, her generosity of spirit then and in her SAG acceptance speech will go a long way to explaining it.
I’d say it’s slightly, slightly more likely that the ultra-dignified Bassett will reign as queen. If there had been a full turning toward Curtis, it would have happened in time for BAFTA as well as SAG. My gut says that even more strongly about Condon: she’d have gone on to win SAG if it were her year. But when there are three viable candidates? Who knows what permutations will arise on the preferential ballot. Congrats, of course, to Stephanie Hsu and Hong Chau for being along on this crazy ride; Bassett and Curtis have been stars for decades, but Chau, Condon and Hsu will hopefully gain more visibility and the chance to tell more stories.
Best Actor
Here’s a race where we have two strong contenders tied in precursor wins. In the one corner we have a comeback story to rival Ke Huy Quan’s in 90’s matinee idol Brendan Fraser, who received his first nomination for his role as an English professor eating himself to death after his lover’s suicide in The Whale. In his tally, Fraser has the Critics Choice and the SAG. In the other corner, there’s child tv star Austin Butler, catapulted to the big leagues after successfully embodying the King on screen and been rewarded for his efforts with a Golden Globe and a BAFTA. Here’s another battle I thought would have different protagonists – it looked like a race between Fraser and Banshee‘s Colin Farrell at first, but while Farrell had enough buzz to win the Globe Best Actor in a comedy, and to secure his first Oscar nomination, he hasn’t come further in the race and is unlikely to factor tonight.
So, how do we guess correctly? Fraser definitely has the better story. He’s struggled with perceptions in the press and online about his looks, which connects to his film’s plea for compassion for its morbidly obese hero. His SAG speech brought that struggle and that invitation to connect right out into the Hollywood community, just before voting began. Butler, on the other hand, is an unknown, which may have helped him transform into one of the 20th century’s most iconic performers. But is he too much of an unknown – too young, too cute, too easy to dismiss – to win? At the end of the day, isn’t even a really impressive Elvis impersonation just another Elvis impersonation?
History (or statistics, if you prefer) tells us that Best Actor wins rarely go to men whose films aren’t nominated for Best Picture. The last time that happened, in fact, was Jeff Bridges in 2009’s Crazy Heart, and that was one of those cases where he ran away with the award – won every critics and precursor prize. We knew in the fall it’d be Bridges, whatever people thought of his movie. If stats are all that matter, they should knock Fraser out of contention – The Whale had buzz, but didn’t connect with the Academy anywhere near the level of Elvis, to a score of 2 nominations to 8.
Some have suggested we’ll get a clue earlier in the evening if either Elvis or The Whale wins best make up; those kind of transformations often go hand in hand (see The Iron Lady).
Here, like everyone else, I don’t know. My head says Butler due to the general love for his movie, but my gut says AMPAS will find it more palatable to vote Fraser. (If the choice had been mine, I’d have been more likely to vote for Farrell, sterling in a movie I disliked, or Bill Nighy, stoic and heartbreaking in a movie I adored, than either of these – The Whale felt stagey and even gimmicky to me, while Elvis was a nice show without much depth or insight. Paul Mescal felt like a real person in the slight, impressionistic Aftersun, but he’s not a factor for the win.)
Best Actress
And yet again we have a horse race. Most people consider it a two way horse race, though it could also be one of those rare cases where a split vote results in an Adrian Brody-style surprise by a third nominee.
In one corner we have one of the greatest craftsmen of her generation, Cate Blanchett as the title character in Tar; Lydia Tar is an enormously gifted mind and conductor, a master manipulator and a self-absorbed risk taker whose luck runs out. Michelle Yeoh’s Evelyn Wang is an immigrant and laundromat owner whose world imploded over business and personal failures, and then explodes back out to dozens of iterations of herself; she navigates a multiverse in order to truly find herself and reconnect with those closest to her. Blanchett has a drama Golden Globe, the Critics Choice and the BAFTA. Yeoh has a comedy Golden Globe, the National Board of Review best actress prize, and the SAG. Blanchett has 8 Oscar nominations and 2 wins; a third win would push her into Meryl Streep/Daniel Day Lewis territory (where indeed she belongs) as an astounding talent and chameleon. First time nominee Yeoh had been buzzed about for Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon, but struggled to find meaty roles as a martial arts star and an Asian actress in America. Will voters decide to heap more praise on someone whose work many call the seminal performance of this year, or will they make history by choosing the first Asian woman as lead actress, the second woman of color ever to win this category? Starring in the film of the year, does Yeoh get her moment in the sun?
Of course decisions about the best performances of a year are always subjective, and voters use many different criteria to make those choices. What connected with them more? What feels more real to you? Are you rewarding one performance, or a career? As much as I admire Blanchett’s craft, Tar left me cold – it’s hard to sympathize with someone who’s achieved elite success but loses it when their cruelty and misuse of power is exposed. I also felt like Todd Field had simply put a woman into a position largely inhabited by men (powerful creator who preys on and abuses women), but said nothing new about either abuse or power by doing so, and that annoyed me.
Or is it possible that surprise nominee Andrea Riseborough, who took alcoholic Leslie through every conceivable high and low in To Leslie, will slip in when the two bigger stars duke it out? First time nominee Ana de Armas (as another 20th century icon, Marilyn Monroe) and five time nominee Michelle Williams (playing Steven Spielberg’s mom, though she’s also been nominated for playing Marilyn Monroe) are much more unlikely spoilers.
The truth is, of course, that no one knows the answer other than the accountant vote counters at Price Waterhouse Coopers. My head says Blanchett, but I’m very much hoping for history to be made, and a tremendous career rewarded, in Michelle Yeoh. More chances will come for Blanchett. It may be her, and not Meryl Streep, who equals or bests Katherine Hepburn’s record of four acting Oscar statuettes. I’m not so sanguine this chance will come again for Yeoh, and I’d be most excited to see her take it.
Best Director
Everything points to a rare win for a directing duo here; like No Country For Old Men‘s Cohen brothers, and West Side Story‘s Jerome Robbins and Robert Wise before them, the Daniels should take it home for Everything Everywhere All at Once. Though the quirky National Board of Review and the celebrity-loving Golden Globes gave their directing prizes to Steven Spielberg, The Fabelmans hasn’t won much elsewhere. Previous unknowns Daniel Kwan and Daniel Scheinert reigned at the Directors Guild and Critics Choice. With BAFTA winner Edward Berger out of the AMPAS nominations, they barely have any competition. And their fingerprints are all over this oddball masterwork.
A note: most predictors are saying that Todd Field is the likely second choice if the Daniels fail to take the brass ring. I can’t think why considering that, of these nominees, it’s Spielberg who’s actually taken other relevant prizes. Spielberg is beloved by audiences and film professionals alike, and this is his most personal work.
Best Picture
Much as Hollywood loves to deride the Marvel Cinematic Universe, a movie like the odds on favorite to win here, Everything Everywhere All at Once, couldn’t have gotten made without it. The fact that audiences are willing to flow with the idea of alternate selves living in parallel universes, working together for the good of all? Never could have happened without the popularization of nerd culture achieved by Marvel studios. Even if Angela Bassett doesn’t give them their first prestige Oscar this year, Kevin Feige should take heart knowing that counterculture versions of the Daniels’ ideas would never have been accepted if Marvel hadn’t mainstreamed them.
Now, of course, we can argue pretty easily that EEAAO isn’t particularly mainstream. I’ve heard it lauded as a “worldwide 100 mil hit”, but it’s at 73 mil in the US, which is modestly successful. In Oscar terms these days, that’s overflowing with box office returns, but it’s not super impressive in general. My point, I suppose, is that AMPAS has been skewing more and more obscure , rather than landing on a film beloved by audiences, critics and the box office, as used to be their wont. This film (as unusual and confusing as many find it) may hit more of those buttons than recent winners Nomadland, Parasite and CODA. We can argue forever about whether this is the best film, or the most representative film of the year. It seems tremendously likely that with 11 nominations, and an outside chance of winning 3 acting prizes (and with top honors from SAG and the Producers Guild and the Critics Choice), is the film the awards community has chosen. It’s hard to say, even, which film could beat it. Banshees didn’t capitalize on early buzz. There’s no indication that folks on this side of the Atlantic like All Quiet as much as the Brits do. The Fabelmans might be more important personally to its director than it is to the culture as a whole. Avatar and Top Gun have their reward in being nominated (and in bringing in oodles of hard-earned money). Elvis seems likely to pick up a lot of awards for its craft, but may be more successful as spectacle as anything else. Tar will have to settle for the respect of film critics, and Women Talking for elevating the complexities of sexual assault. Triangle of Sadness can keep enjoying its Palme D’Or in Europe.
The Rest
I wasn’t able to see as many films as I hoped this year. I left a few available streamers on the table in Best Song and Cinematography, but generally I’m pleased with what I did see. All Quiet on the Western Front, The Fablemans, Glass Onion, Living, and Top Gun: Maverick make up my personal top five.
As I said, Elvis is largely expected to pick up prizes for things like Production Design and Costumes; it may end up with a higher total of wins than EEAAO, depending on how the acting awards sort out. Putting Guillermo del Toro’s name in the title may help Pinocchio (a deeply weird and beautiful version of a story I hate) grab a win in Animated Feature, and beautiful aesthetics seems likely to boost the sweet short The Boy, the Mole, the Fox and the Horse to a win in Animated Short, unless the truly excellent My Year of Dicks catches attention with its shocking name. Song seems very much up for grabs; RRR’s “Naatu Naatu” had initial momentum, and it’s never easy to discount Lady Gaga, but it should be hard to beat out Rihanna’s emotional “Lift Me Up” from Wakanda Forever. I’m holding out hope for brilliant and moving documentaries Fire of Love and Stranger at the Gate, though Navalny and The Elephant Whisperers would be worthy winners as well.
And that’s how it stands. I’m so, so interested in seeing how it all shakes out.
Relatively Entertaining 