Interiority vs Exteriority. Olsen vs. Knightley
Wednesday, October 5, 2011 at 7:12PM Anecdote / Conjecture time. I finally caught the Sundance hit Martha Marcy May Marlene (thoughts forthcoming but definitely in the "must-see!" division) which is the star-making, or at least actress-making, debut of 22 year-old Elizabeth Olsen who is the younger sister of the famous/infamous Olsen Twins.
Critics screenings at the New York Film Festival often end with a mini press-conference and the writer/director Sean Durkin and Olsen (who seems to go by "Lizzy") were on hand today to answer questions. If you've ever been to a Q&A you'll know that most people preface their question with some sort of comment about their own feelings for the movie -- usually ass-kissing praise since the stars are present and stars have wondrous heinies.
One reporter, justifiably thrilled by Olsen's work as Martha says this to Lizzy:
I wanted to compliment you on the interiority of your characterization. You didn't externalize it the way some people do by being "insane" visually and that interiority was very engulfing and very convincing in comparison to some of the performances we've seen... it was a relief, actually.
LOL. I wonder who on earth she could be dissing...
[HINT: A Dangerous Method played for the same crowd in the same time slot the day before.]
To tell you the truth this coded jab made me feel a bit bad for Keira Knightley since different roles require different things of the actors who play them. A Dangerous Method obviously asks for exteriority in the character of Sabine who is, discarding sensititivy, a crazy person. For what it's worth, Olsen does have a couple big and uncharacteristically showy moments herself as Martha (also: crazy person) and I'm reasonably certain they'd be used as her Oscar clips and misrepresent the performance were she to be nominated. But I'm not so sure she will be. It seems to me that Knightley (should she campaign in lead) and Olsen have an inverted mirror problem when it comes to the race for a nomination. One is giving a showy external performance within a film that people just don't love that is, all the same, in the key of Oscar (period piece, expensive looking, biographical, traditionally romantically tragic) and the other is giving a restrained internal performance within a film that people do love that is, all the same, largely sung in a key outside Oscar's range (contemporary, low budget, fictional, very unsettling and untraditionally non-cathartic).
So who gets nominated? Or is it both? Neither? I swear, the more one stares at the Best Actress category this year the more confused one becomes.
Reader Comments (15)
I'm betting neither gets in. Two divisive movies/roles (especially Method. I'm predicting Kirsten and Felicity Jones (Jones because it's more of Academy friendly easy to like movie) even if it isn't a tear jerker. With all the press von trier is getting maybe the Academy will feel bad for Kiki and nominate her anyway. Anne Thompson has her in her top 5 (:
Totally different “crazy” roles. Keira plays Sabina who suffers hysteria. So I won’t be surprised seeing her being “insane” visually on screen. That also means I’m all for Keira to get a second nod in Best Actress.
Of Olsen, Jones, and Knightley, I'd rate them in that order... MMMM is much higher on RT than Like Crazy and both have been less divisive than Knightley. Mara? I have absolutely no clue.
Nathaniel, what do you make of the surprise film screening at NYFF next Monday?
I think the backlash against Keira's performance is going to work against her; don't think she'll be getting in anymore.
I'm still hoping for Elizabeth Olsen, I think she has a chance.
^ And I actually could buy into what Robby's saying about KiKi getting in through sympathy..Hm, guess we'll see.
Rooney Mara may be the one to edge them out.
I have only seen "Method" so far, and I think Keira's chance is rather slim. The screening I was at was for an major award group and it was very clear that most members didn't buy her performance at all. Many think she is really skilled and committed but believe it's a role that should be played by an unknown actress in the first place.
Thats just a f'ing stupid comparrison to make. Keira is playing a wonam wth hysteria, ravaged by facial ticks, and felt like she was a dog... of course it is going to seem like she is going to be overacting compared to Olson.
I really think that critics need to read interviews by KNightley about Sabina before seeing the film, that way they would have a better understanding of a difficult performance.
Have you read many of the reviews coming out of NYFF, numerous best in show type of reviews for KK. I think she could still get in.
I know I'm a KK fan, but what an unfair statement to make. Keira played hysterical, with factual documents saying that Sabina was ravaged by tics. Of course her interior trauma is going to be manifested physically! It's not like she thought of this out of he blue.
I wish I hadn't read this because it just sends me in a tailspin. :(
Girl is still getting raves, so that reporter can.. well, I'll just leave it at that.
I think Rooney Mara deserves the nomination better than Olsen. And the Girl with the Dragon Tattoo campaign's kinda crazy.
Keira will be totally snubbed. sadly. There's Anna Karenina so wait for next year.
Meryl Streep or Glenn Close will win anyway. :)
It's a very competitive year! I dont understand why there's an influx of good performances both for Actor and Actress categories. Even Best Picture!
I saw both Keira and Elizabeth's performances at TIFF and I have to say that Elizabeth knocked it out the ball park. Sure, both characters are different and disturbed in their own way, but I found the subtle damage done to Elizabeth in MMMM, more scary, paranoid, and profound than Keira's in DM. Both may wind up getting nominated, but between the two, Olsen was the strongest.
Here's my guess for what we'll see:
(I did my rankings in likelihood of getting nominated)
1. Viola Davis -- all sewn up
2. Glenn Close -- I doubt she'll get many critics awards, but her overdue status has secured her a nomination
3. Charlize Theron -- Diablo Cody says this is something new from her, and Charlize is working with Reitman
4. Meryl Streep -- the movie won't be well-reviewed, so the performance must win over the critics to a near-unanimous extent
5. Rooney Mara -- if the movie's a box office hit AND a critical hit AND she gets singled out, she might win; the part is edgy and transformative
ON THE OUTSIDE:
6. Michelle Williams - will it be too light? will she strike the right balance of mimicry and originality?
7. Kirsten Dunst - will the critics be as warm as Cannes?
8. Elizabeth Olsen - she needs a big critics award push
9. Felicity Jones - she needs a big critics award push
I support Simone's comment. I saw both films in Toronto and let me say Olsen is outstanding (I could applaud a victory for the Oscars). Even if both performances are very diferent between them, I love how Olsen made Martha as a paranoic and damaged girl with worst results than Knightley's "over-the-top" and unsuccesful try as Sabina Spielrein (I read the interviews and I tried to like the film, even when I'm not a Keira fan), but her performance was dissapointed.
My predictions for nominees:
1. Rooney Mara
2. Meryl Streep
3. Viola Davis
If this race will continue like that, these are the very likely nominees. Even if the film isn't acclaimed, Streep could win there if Mara underperformed. But Mara's buzz is too big to ignore. Davis is the alternative
4. Elizabeth Olsen - I think Olsen will be the critics' darling. She could be few of the big four (NBR, LAFCA, NYFCC & NSFC)
5. Glenn Close - She has the "history", but with the lukewarm and dissapointed voice from critics and pronosticators, her nom could be the reward
6. Michelle Williams - Now, even with the trailer is a question mark. But in a few we'll known
7. Tilda Swinton - Two words: Cynthia Schwartzman
8. Charlize Theron - Big question mark
9. Keira Knightley - A Golden Globe nom is very likely even a BAFTA nom, but I think she'll be snubbed.
Rooney Mara is the one who's gonna survive the newcomer slot race for a nomination, I think.
I saw MMMM and I actually thought Olsenwas good, but not great. It felt like I was watching Winter's Bone pt. 2 and Jennifer Lawrence pt 2
I haven't seen either films of course but I wonder Nat - isn't "relative fame" also a consideration in who gets nominated and who doesn't?