1994 Q&A: Frankenstein, Weaver, Past Glories, Future Nominations.
Thursday, June 28, 2018 at 6:22PM Okay, our last dive into 1994! I recently asked readers to send in their '94 related questions (other questions will still be answered but that's for the next Q&A). So here's our final pontifying for that year. You asked, I answer.
JAMES: 1994 was the year of Frankenstein, the movie that led to Emma Thompson and Kenneth Branagh splitting up, due to his affair with HBC. Thoughts on Thompson & Branagh’s (professional) partnership? What projects would they have excelled at if they stayed together?
"IT'S ALIVE!" Or, rather. "IT'S DEAD!" Emma and Kenneth. Kenneth and Emma. Sigh. Insert broken heart emoji. Young Nathaniel was so sad when they split. They were the Definitive Early 90s 'It Couple: UK Edition. That was such an awesome cinematic partnership. I adored their over-the-top genre mashup and reincarnation chutzpah in Dead Again and their luminous Shakespearean comedy in Much Ado About Nothing.
If you think about it Frankenstein, with its pulp grotesqueries, and bodice-ripped lustiness is absolutely the work of the same guy who made Dead Again. I miss that Branagh, still...
Yes, he's a bit camp as a director what with the huge overwrought feeling and swing for the fences productions but when the alternate is his new anemic tendencies (Murder on the Orient Express, anyone?) I'll take it!
I suspect had Kenneth and Emma stuck together they would have had a few more great movies in them -- and I wish we had more couples or platonic co-stars or director/muse duos who would build filmographies together; seeing great chemistry wasted is rubbish -- but they also might just have easily gone a bit stale. There's working with friends/loved ones and then there's constantly working with the same people and not challenging yourself which can cause creative ruts (see Spielberg & Kaminski or Burton & Depp or whatnot)
An unusual year when 3 of the 4 acting winners were repeats.
CASH: Which 1994 acting nominee is most likely to be nominated again in the future? And which one would you most like to see nominated in the future? (My answers: Mirren and Ryder.)
Okay so 20 people to choose from. Process of elimination: Newman, Hawthorne, Landau, and Scofield -- all superb actors -- no longer walk the earth *sniffle* so not them. Most of the others seem unlikely given that they either no longer care about challenging themselves in the acting department (Foster and Jackson) have lost public favor (Sarandon and Freeman) or are no longer prominently featured in high profile films or have decisively moved to TV or whatnot (Sinise, Palminteri, Lange, Tilly, Thurman, Ryder, Harris, and Travolta).
If Dame Helen can almost get nominated for Trumbo of all things, she'll definitely be back again!It's a complete mystery to me why the obvious answer to this question isn't both Miranda Richardson and Dianne Wiest but they fall into the latter category. Despite being amazing actors who have delivered more than one genius performance in their careers, prestige filmmakers don't seem interested; it's totally our loss.
So that leaves the two we're going with. Remember how every year we all think Tom Hanks is getting nominated again and then every time he doesn't, even when he deserves it (see Captain Phillips)? Despite this almost comic history of "oops, nope!" I do think he will get another nomination. In fact, I think he could even win a third. They've ignored him for so long that he no longer feels overrewarded (which will help) and he's still well liked. But the definitive non-risky answer is Helen Mirren. Like Streep, if to a lesser degree, she has a way of getting people excited about every single performance whether or not that particular performance is exciting. Which means she'll definitely be up there again. She probably just missed for both Trumbo (2015) and Hitchcock (2012) and neither of those near-nominations would have aged well had they come to pass.
MR W: Have you any thoughts about Rena Owen in Once Were Warriors? (This is one of my very favorite performances of the decade, and should have won the Best Actress Oscar handily if people had actually watched the film.)
Gulp. I've never seen it. I do enjoy Rena Owen's earnest severity on the TV show Siren though so I should probably watch this.
/3RTFUL: What made the Academy cold to Sigourney Weaver in the 90s? She had Dave (1993), Death and the Maiden (1994), The Ice Storm (1997), and A Map of the World (1999).
REBECCA: My question - Forrest Gump: why?
The eternal question. Unfortunately America is answering that again right now. The past couple of years have reminded us that Americans worship ignorance (see T***p) and love the conservative brainwashing that suggests that if we ask questions or become politically engaged the end is nigh. Poor Jenny!
EVANGELINA: I know 1994 wasn't a particularly great year for female leads (as far as the actual nominated performances are concerned), but out of all 1994 films which role do you most wish Michelle Pfeiffer had snagged?
Oooh great Q. 1994 marked the turning point in Michelle Pfeiffer's career where she quit chasing the Oscar. After The Age of Innocence snub she made a swerve to strictly mainstream 'light' entertainment (romantic comedies, multiplex dramas, genre films) and it started with 1994's Wolf. It's one of the least challenging leading roles of her career but, as we just mentioned on a recent podcast, it's among her most physically beautiful star turns. Obviously because I think she's a stellar actor when challenged I would have loved to see her in virtually any of the leading roles that year. I wanted to say True Lies or River Wild or The Client but Pfeiffer got her chance to wow in mainstream genre fare and elevate B pictures meant for everyone so that's not the answer. So my top three would go like so:
- The Last Seduction -- because there haven't been enough pfilms that made Pfeiffer's icy carnality feel dangerous to other characters (it's usually more internal danger) so that would have been awesome.
- When a Man Loves a Woman -- because Pfeiffer as an alcoholic with a crumbling marriage would probably have spelled Oscar nomination in that particular year
- Queen Margot -- not that actual movie, mind you, as she doesn't speak French but a Pfeiffer costume drama that leaned into her unobtainable sexual allure and sadness would be... oh wait, she'd just done that in The Age of Innnocence. So never mind: The Last Seduction and When a Man Loves a Woman it is!
HOPE YOU ENJOYED OUR 1994 COVERAGE, PEOPLE. If you missed any of it we talked Best Supporting Actress, True Lies, Pulp Fiction and Bullets Over Broadway, The Madness of King George and Tom & Viv, Best Actress, The River Wild, The Lion King, Muriel's Wedding, and an overview of 94 in general.
Reader Comments (24)
Tom Hanks has been overlooked by the Academy in 4 of the last 5 years. It's not like he deserved a nomination for every one of these film, but at least the films got Oscar attention in other categories. I am referring to Captain Phillips (2013), Bridge of Spies (2015), Sully (2016) and The Post (2017).
An unusual year indeed. The only other time when 3 of the acting winners were repeats was I think 1938, with Tracy/Davis/Brennan repeating and Bainter winning her first.
Emma Thompson & Kenneth Branaugh were incredible together, I would love to see them do something now. But I do think you are right that splitting up helped them both challenge themselves a little more. I'm getting a bit nostalgic over what a golden couple they were.
Definitely agree about Weaver. 1994 was a pretty weak year and her performance in Death and the Maiden was still left out. Never seen A Map of the World but but Copycat is undervalued. Galaxy Quest also holds up well.
I am a cheerleader for Once Were Warriors, and keep urging people to watch it. I remember the first time seeing it, not really expecting much (the plot summary made it sound rather soap-operaish, and Lee Tamahori didn't exactly strike me as the most exciting of directors), and being blown away. That held up on subsequent viewing, as well.
And Rena Owen is a revelation.
After Sigourney Weaver got two nominations and no Oscar in 1988, I had the feeling they only would nominate her again, when they could be sure she would get the Oscar, to spare her another humiliation. Sadly, there was never such an occasion. The same could be said for Julianne Moore after her double loss in 2002 and would explain, why she was never nominated again (despite several possibilities like "Single Man" or "Kids are all right") till "Still Alice" came along, for which she was the favorite. So Sigourney would need her "Still Alice" to be back in the game. Does that make any sense?
The whole coverage of 1994 only makes me wish for more years to be covered in the very near future. Seems like everybody had fun with this one. I would turn this into a category on the blog. It was great.
RE Weaver remember who she is and who her parents were,she is a no bull kinda girl and some people are put off by that persona.
I have researched Weaver articles and what I can sniff about them is that she maybe seen as difficult or forthright which probably means she has an opinion.
I'd have nominated her 4 more times after 1988 in 94,97 winner,99 and 2007 for The TV Set,she's hilarious in that.
I'd have liked Michelle to channel Dorothy Parker then i'd have been spared JJL'S take on her
I think I put Owen in my top five over on the other thread. She's so great in that film (although it is very much of its time as suburban miserabalism was quite the thing).
Thank heavens Helen Mirren didn't get those HITCHCOCK and TRUMBO nods. And that WOMAN IN GOLD, THE LIESURE SEEKER and 200 MILE JOURNEY or whatever that one was never took off beyond the typical Globes nods.
Susan Sarandon was campaigning for Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez while Messing and Tamblyn were moaning on twitter so no, she hasn't lost my favor.
BD -- but we cover years regularly... unless you mean something more specific?
I echo the love for Rena Owen in Once Were Warriors -- that last scene in the film where she invoked the title of the film still gives me goosebumps. Years ago when I was working for an international film festival, I met Owen and I got the chance to tell her how much I thought her performance as Beth Heke was an amazing creation. She was nice, gracious and was quite chatty. Although I wasn't the biggest fan of What Becomes of the Broken Hearted?, I still think that Beth Heke is unforgettable because of Owen's superb and credible characterisation.
I like the film version of Death and the Maiden although the Broadway play was supposed to be electric. I read reviews about the unimpeachable chemistry between Close, Hackman and Dreyfuss onstage. Was Paulina and the complexity of her trauma (some say paranoia) supposed to mirror Chile's own encounter with that dark period of their history? Nevertheless, Weaver was quite believable as Paulina Salas especially when she has to say things like: "The minute I give up the gun all discussion will end." She was aces in The Ice Storm but then again it was a uniformly fantastic ensemble.
And Dead Again is an enjoyable film (plus Hanna Schygulla was in it). I would always remember how Branagh's 1940s character was singing "Lush Life" before his execution. So ironic, so sad, so lovely. Thompson and Branagh were in top form here.
Maybe BD meant discussing specific weak years in the acting categories,that would be fun,focus on the notoriously weak ones 2009 Supporting Actor comes to mind of recent times and how about 1997 for a weak supporting actress year apart from the winner oh sorry Moore didn't win.
Markgordon: people put down 97 supporting actress, but I really love that lineup, apart from Stuart. I think Cusack, Driver and Basinger are doing really good work. (But I get that Moore should have won, and I would have traded any of them for Sarah Polley in Hereafter.)
Sigourney Weaver should have three Oscars: Aliens, Working Girl and The Ice Storm.
I usually find it hyperbolic when people say "so-and-so should have 3+ Oscars" (I rarely do it) but the timing and power of those performances really merits it. Each one fell in fairly weak year for its respective category: Matlin? Davis? Basinger? Hardly all-time stuff.
Weaver has been worthier of more specific Oscars than most great actresses ever "get" to be. All the more frustrating that she doesn't have *one*.
I know it's been 20 plus years since I've seen it, but if it helps at all, I thought Once Were Warriors had a lot of dangerous hotness in it as I recall. ;-)
My 1997 Supporting Actress:
Sigourney Weaver, "The Ice Storm" * WINNER
Sarah Polley, "The Sweet Herafter"
Julianne Moore, "Boogie Nights"
Judy Davis, "Deconstructing Harry"
Minnie Driver, "Good Will Hunting"
Oh damn, I forgot about Boogie Nights. Sorry, Sigourney, just two wins for you. But it's close.
Paranoid Android: I thought Minnie Driver was kind of just...there...in Good Will Hunting, honestly. At least five actresses around that age at that time, including Polley, would have been able to outdo her with the same material and, honestly, both Driver (Lead) and Joan Cusack were way better in Grosse Pointe Blank than in their nominated work.
My SA Ballot that year:
Joan Cusack, Grosse Pointe Blank - Winner (Note: I'd actually give this every acting statue, but no other major win. Its editing is kind of slack, its screenplay is good, but not the best and its decidedly NOT a directorial triumph in ANY sense.)
Linda Fiorentino, Men in Black - 5th
Bridget Fonda, Jackie Brown - Bronze
Julianne Moore, Boogie Nights - Silver
Sigourney Weaver, The Ice Storm - 4th
(And, to be serious, this is an essentially neck and neck race between the top 4.)
Note: In the supporting actress category, the four performances that were nominated that I didn't would be Basinger at 7th, Stuart at 9th (rest of my top 10 for 1997 would be Mindy Sterling, Kathy Bates and Christina Ricci), but Joan Cusack for In & Out and Minnie Driver for Good Will Hunting would probably not even make my top twenty that year, let alone five or ten.
Michelle Pfeiffer would have elevated When a Man Loves a a Woman for sure. I need to check out Wolf.
As for Wiest and Richardson, it is indeed a travesty they've kind of been lost to time. At least Wiest has her two Oscars. I suspect Miranda Richardson was too difficult and picky in the 90s, but I hope the inevitable damehood changes things...
Speaking of which, can anyone explain Dame Helen Mirren's mystifying reputation? Aside from Gosford Park, she leaves me cold and TMoKG is a testament to that.
It’s so interesting to read someone downplay Cusack’s tragicomically ballsy work in In & Out. Amid a near-perfect ensemble, she was the MVP of that dated though still LOL funny film. In fact, to me she was a close second to Moore (among the nominees) or Weaver (inexplicably snubbed) for the Oscar *win*. Granted I haven’t seen Grosse Pointe Blank in ages, but this Cusack performance is kinetic and one helluva tightrope if you consider the ways it could’ve gone manically, maniacally off course. (Seriously, given Addams Family Values and In & Out, is there a more gifted comedienne for screenwriter Paul Rudnick’s words than Cusack?)
It’s a shame that Anne Heche in Donnie Branco or Debbi Morgan in Eve’s Bayou couldn’t gain any Oscar traction. Heche, like Cusack, had quite the body of work in ‘97 (notably Wag the Dog), and Morgan is Monique-level virtuousity if memory serves. Moore, whom I hadn’t seen in Safe at the time, really stepped up her game and fulfilled her early promise (The Hand That Rocks the Craddle, Short Cuts) following boarderline-bad performances in Nine Months and The Lost World.
P.S. Was there a more boringly dressed quartet of Oscar winning actors than in '94? Thank God for Lizzy Gardiner (The Adventures of Priscilla, Queen of the Desert), who legendarily showed us how to dress memorably earlier in that Oscar ceremony.
As far as the Academy is concerned Once Were Warriors, like Muriel's Wedding, is a 1995-eligible movie.
I just caught up with The Meddler, and I have to say Susan Sarandon was sublime. I, too, have had it with her politics (the main reason I avoided the movie in the first place), but her acting is as brilliant as ever. She took a show-up-and-collect-my-paycheck-for-giving-you-Susan-Sarandon-ness and filled it with unexpected nuances and multifaceted dimensions. I hope she has a long career. And I hope she STFP between movies.
"It's a complete mystery to me why the obvious answer to this question isn't both Miranda Richardson and Dianne Wiest but they fall into the latter category. Despite being amazing actors who have delivered more than one genius performance in their careers, prestige filmmakers don't seem interested; it's totally our loss."
I'm not sure this is such a mystery. "Prestige" directors don't work with woman over a certain age (usually 50/55) in meaningful ways and almost never have substantial roles for them in films. This has been somewhat true for Meryl, even.